Author: James T. Walker
Date: 06:38:26 01/19/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 18, 2003 at 15:01:22, GuyHaworth wrote: > >You are right that I can't be sure that you have other than DTM EGTs. That is >why I put a '(?)'. > >If you have non-DTM EGTs, by all means let us know. If you have DTR EGTs, which >are the definitive data on whether one can beat a k-move rule for some k, you >have an opportunity to write about that in the ICGA Journal or elsewhere. > > >It is you that is claiming that it is a draw under the 50-move rule: I am >merely saying that you cannot be sure if you only have DTM EGTs. > > >I am not claiming that it is not a 50-move draw ... merely that you can't be >sure with non-DTR EGTs. > >I don't therefore need to produce a line that beats the 50-move rule - though it >would be good to be able to give you the DTR-minimaxing line, I agree. > >I hope that is all clear. > >g Well it's like the Einstein theory of the expanding universe. He believed it but he couldn't prove it. When he asked the "Expert" astronomers of his day at what rate was the universe expanding they told him that it wasn't. He was later proved correct. I will believe the databases I have untill someone can prove otherwise. :-) Jim
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.