Author: Omid David
Date: 03:38:57 07/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 17, 2002 at 00:09:49, Russell Reagan wrote: >One other issue I thought of was whether or not you should require a standard >protocol to be followed (like Winboard). I think this would be very >advantageous. This could possibly eliminate the "move now" cheating if you >disallowed operators to mess with the computer unless in the case of a crash or >other kind of error. I also think that if you do something like the WCCC did and >have a blitz tournament one day (for fun, I suppose) then you would certainly >want to make it automated instead of requiring the operator to move the pieces >on a board. A blitz tournament between computers that isn't automated and has >the interference of human hands is a crap shoot. > >I think another option would be to hold the tournament electronically, and you >can either run your engine via the Winboard interface or you can be forced to >type in the moves or use the mouse to make a move. This would encourage the use >of winboard protocol since it would be disadvantageous to have to waste time by >entering moves manually. > >In any case, I thought this is something that should be addressed. I personally >think playing on a board is kind of primitive for a computer chess event. > >Russell Sure, manual blitz (as in Maastricht) is ridiculous. Dr.Hyatt has always advocated an automated system, and I agree with that. Omid.
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.