Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: time note

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 06:44:40 10/28/02

Go up one level in this thread


On October 28, 2002 at 09:38:57, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:

I hope you realize that i prefer a time control of 40 in 2.
However, if you play blitz levels like 90 0, then you have
consequences like this. If you asked me in advance, then
i would not have told you to expect that i would get to
move 187 at all in a computer-computer game which was
hand operated.

Both operators played like 50 moves extra with very little time
on the clock.

If you do not find it fair to win on time, then don't play 90 0
is my viewpoint. I prefer 40 in 2 myself too. If you go 90 0,
it is unpreventable that a number of games end in a time win.

In this case i can add that for like 150 moves i had a won position
with DIEP. If that's not enough moves... :)

>On October 28, 2002 at 08:50:52, Jouni Uski wrote:
>
>it was time trouble. if you see well then you will see that
>before the times were put to blitz at the programs, that white
>was won whole endgame. Just exchanging rooks leads to a win
>for white. Regrettably when i had a big fail high to exchange
>rooks, then Warp played some other move and then the search
>depth was not enough (at already like 10 minutes time left)
>to exchange rooks.
>
>in the time trouble very weird things happened.
>
>>I take a quick look at the DOCC 2002 games and noticed, that there are
>>unbelievable
>>short games like Djenghis - Ant 0-1 after 5 moves. So there was a lot amateurs
>>and
>>beginners I quess. But there is one very long game = Diep - Warp, which ended
>>1-0
>>after 187 games in this position:
>>
>>[D]8/2k1KP2/7R/8/8/7p/8/4r3 w - - 0 188
>>
>>Is this really whites win?
>>
>>Jouni



This page took 0.07 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.