Author: Uri Blass
Date: 14:38:12 04/28/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 28, 2001 at 17:23:30, Peter Berger wrote: >On April 28, 2001 at 15:00:51, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>On April 28, 2001 at 12:57:13, Peter Berger wrote: >> ><snip> >>>And again : no commercial chessprogram does it properly ! >>> >>>Do you read this , Christophe :-) ? >> >> >> >>Yes I have read this carefully, and as far as I know my chess program does not >>behave incorrectly when it announces draw by repetition or draw by the 50 moves >>rule. >> >>I'm not very concerned by the fact that the program should first write its move >>on the scoresheet, and claim a draw without stopping the clock. >> >>My program either stops the clock and claims the draw, or makes its move, stop >>the clock and claims the draw. >> >>It does not make any difference as long as the draw claim is correct. As far as >>I know the arbiter cannot force the players to continue playing if the draw >>claim is correct, so it does not matter if the clock as been stopped or not. > >Please understand that I would be the first one to agree that this is a very >minor topic ; most of this is a design question I think . And the point I still >can't understand at all is when you have the choice : why not simply implement >it following the official rules of chess ? > >Let's start with the one you are not concerned by : > >a.) Draw offers > >The programs I know that _can_ make draw offers are the Chessbase ones ( >including your Tiger btw ) as the job is done by the GUI and Shredder 5 ( same >design ) . > >Both simply do it in the wrong way . They always offer draw _instead_ of making >a move . You have the right to offer a draw when it is your turn to move without making a move. The opponent can ask you to play a move but it is not wrong to offer a draw when it is your turn to move(programs should accept the reply I will answer only after your move). It is not necessary to do it this way - it's simply bad design I think >. > >There is _one_ program that does it correctly when playing under WinBoard : >Gandalf ; currently I don't remember how Crafty does it . > >I hope when Tiger learns this it will do it correctly . > >b.) 3rd repetition/50 moves rule > >Programs do the strangest things here - a few days ago I observed the program >"Der Bringer" - it claimed "draw by repetition" ( so far, so good ) but then it >made a move blundering a queen . > >Again : either you claim draw or you make a move - not both . > >I agree to most of what you have written . > >But note - both : the 3rd repetition and the 50 moves rule are _optional_ . You >can choose to claim draw _or_ you can choose to play on . > >Imagine the following situation : Tiger is up two queens but by a miracle the >opponent can force a perpetual by chosing a very narrow path to escape . I don't >think it makes any sense for Tiger to claim a draw by repetition here I see nothing wrong with it if the opponent was smart enough to force tiger to repeat the position 3 times then it is a waste of time to continue the game. - the only >option you have to offer is one for the opponent to claim it . > >Or you have a KRB-KR ending with the bishop up - why should the program claim a >draw by the 50 moves rule then ? This would be for the opponent to do . This is about the strength of the program but I do not find it as a problem in comp-comp games and it may be only a problem against humans at time trouble because under normal conditions there is no chance that humans will miss the fact that they can ask for a draw by the 50 move rule. Uri
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.