Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:20:05 04/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 29, 2001 at 17:16:29, Peter Berger wrote: >On April 29, 2001 at 15:54:58, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: > >>On April 29, 2001 at 10:47:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On April 29, 2001 at 05:10:24, Peter Berger wrote: >>> >> >>[snip] >> >>>>In case the 3rd repetition position will be reached by a certain move it could >>>>say : >>>> >>>>" I intend to play 49. Rc8+ and claim draw by repetition ." >>>> >>>>That ICC and WinBoard/XBoard currently don't support doing it like this doesn't >>>>mean it can't be done at all . An enhancement of the WinBoard protocol adding a >>>>"claimdraw" as Miguel A. Ballicora suggested would be a good start . >>> >>>If it was done in winboard and winboard was made compatible with _all_ >>>chess servers, this would be easy. But not all servers handle that case, >>>meaning winboard would have to behave as it does now for those servers that >>>don't... >>> >> >>That's true, but it does not mean that the protocol could be improved. >>Winboard could receive the command "claimdraw move" and send >>move >>1/2-1/2 >>to FICS and ICS since these servers do it wrong. When the servers improve >>their protocols, winboard is ready as well all the compatible engines. >>Besides, I wonder if sending those two commands in batch, Winboard could >>improved any possible race condition in the server (before the opponent >>replies). >> >>>>>I have seen that scenario played in major WC type events. I once watched >>>>>Korchnoi do exactly that in a US Open game... He made the move on the board, >>>>>wrote it down, claimed a draw, and got the arbiter... >>>> >>>>I don't get your point here - so Korchnoi did wrong ..; the rule explains >>>>exactly how it should be done . >>>> >>>>pete >>> >>>If I am not mistaken, "your move is not completed until you press the clock >>>button to stop your clock and start your opponent's clock." Therefore making >>>the move on the board does not invalidate a draw claim. >> >>Not under FIDE. 6.1 "The move is completed: in the case of the transfer of a >>piece to a vacant square, when the players hand has released the piece" >>and some other examples. >> >>It is different under USCF (probably, the only place in the world) where >>there is a distinction between move "determined" and "completed" (includes >>punching the clock) (rule 9g, 9g1 and 14c2, 14c4). USCF rules are kind of weird >>because it allows the claiming after moving but it is strongly discouraged and >>not recommended. There is even some contradiction if we read carefully. >>My comment: it is even dangerous to claim in this way. You move and do not >>punch the clock. Well, what if a reply immediately on the board? I just say >>that you forgot to punch the clock. I would not want to be involved in that >>mess... >> >>So Korchnoi did not do it wrong because it was in a US open (aren't US Open >>suppose to be played under FIDE rules so it can be FIDE rated? I wonder) >>Anyway, I would not learn rules from those super-GMs. They many times >>get away with things that no other will. >> >>Regards, >>Miguel > >Thank you very much for posting this message ; I was completely puzzled as it >felt like Dr. Hyatt and Andrew Dados were unfriendly and didn't _read_ and >_listen_ where I was _so_ sure to simply be right ;-) . > >Another example for the fact that it's always wrong to assume everything is just >the same in other countries . > >In Germany the rules have been like the FIDE ones since I have started playing >chess in a chessclub about 20 years ago - it was interesting to learn it used to >be different in the US . > >Regards, > >pete I did not mean to sound "unfriendly" at all. If I did, then I certainly apologize for doing so. However, Crafty has played in _several_ USCF-rated events. I will _guarantee_ you that it follows the FIDE rule book perfectly, as it does the USCF rule book. Because the _operator_ is responsible for making the moves, recording the game score, and pressing the clock. That is the way it was designed from day one, since neither FIDE nor USCF rules allow playing chess on a monitor. Since the operator has to operate on behalf of the program according to the rules established for blind chess players, the program can _not_ make a mistake if it tells the operator _clearly_ what he is to do at the point a draw occurs. At the point in time when computers can play _directly_, then the protocols will have to change. But right now, there is no problem whatsoever. Note that this is based on 25 years of playing in USCF events with Blitz, Cray Blitz and now Crafty.
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.