Author: blass uri
Date: 14:16:49 09/08/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 08, 1998 at 16:07:31, David Eppstein wrote: >While I don't disagree with your judgement in this game, I have some concern >with your methodology: > >On September 08, 1998 at 14:02:44, Dirk Frickenschmidt wrote: >>In the game below Rebel9 played it's Slav >>defence very well, finally reaching an endgame with one pawn up. I already was >>convinced that Junior would suffer its first loss against Rebel. >... >>I judged the game as win for Junior >>after move 65; if anyone disagrees it will probably be easy to demonstrate the >>win: black cannot prevent to lose one remaining pawn after the other and then >>ist mated with king+rook against king. > >What is the difference between these two situations? >In one, you are convinced that Junior will lose, so you keep playing. >In the other, you are convinced that Junior will win, so you end the game. The difference is that in the first situation Dirk had no basis to be convinced that Junior will lose(the evaluation of Junior5 was less than 1 pawn advantage for Rebel) and in the other case Dirk had basis to be convinced that Junior5 is winning(the evaluation of Junior5 was 5 pawns advantage for Junior5 and I believe that the evaluation of Rebel9 was similiar). Uri > >In what circumstances do you declare a game over? >Shouldn't you wait until the programs themselves checkmate or resign? >Otherwise you leave yourself open to questions of partiality.
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.