Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 16:08:53 11/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 17, 2002 at 18:38:07, Russell Reagan wrote: >>People have been known to cheat when it wasn't automated, why not fix a >>"security-hole" we know to be there? That is not the same as saying there aren't >>other ways cheat, but I don't really see any people saying that either :) > >I think at a minimum we should either not be required to kibitz the PV, and only >a score (which would be sufficient for spectators' desires), or we should be >allowed to whisper the information instead of kibitz. As Bob pointed out, this >would require one to create another thread or process and log onto ICC and pull >the information off as a spectator, then pass it back to the main engine. As >long as we are going to add in rules to make it harder to cheat, why not make >this one very slight change which won't affect anyone? > >Or maybe my "pv" will be something like, "I'm thinking about moving my light >squared bishop on KB1 to Q3." Or maybe ROT-13 it :) Actually I think the PV is free format, so you might get 1.Nf3 d5 2. .... or b1c3 d7d5 or Nb1c3 Pd7d5, or even as you say "knight closer to his king looks good" :) But since PV's are not always accurate I think playing by that strategy would guarantee you a loss. Perhaps we could zip the exe (with a password) and send it to the referee before the match. Should there be any allogations or suspicion later on, the auther gives the password to unzip it and the referee can have a look at the binary. That way the referee doesn't get a lot of free programs (like Ferret) for no reason at all. -S. >Russell
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.