Author: Uri Blass
Date: 02:35:03 01/26/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 26, 2003 at 04:58:21, Frank Phillips wrote: >On January 26, 2003 at 03:33:23, Jorge Pichard wrote: > >>http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=750 > >Then it is a shame that they will not be playing the same game that Deep Blue >and Kasparov played. > >Unless I have misunderstood the contract, this is a modified version of chess to >that defined by the standard rules, which nowhere states that because one side >knows that the game is drawn with perfect play then it shall be declared a draw >- even if the other side does not know or cannot demonstrate it. > >I would have left it to the players to behave appropriately in simple KBvKR >endings etc, but KRvKRP, KQPvKQ certainly has plenty of play. > >This is the commercial companies show so they can agree the rules of the >contest, but they do not own and cannot redefine chess - I hope. > >Frank No They do not need to redefine chess. If the programmers decide that they offer a draw in drawn 5 piece tablebase position the result is going to be the same result. I do not understand why people consider it as important when there is more than 99% chance that the problem is not going to be relevant and even if the players get 5 piece endgame the result of it is going to be obvious. Junior7 also does not have swindle mode and it plays the first drawing move out of tablebases in case of a tablebase draw. I believe that Amir Ban did not care to spend time on implementing swindle mode. It may be important in blitz game against humans but it probably does not give more than 0.1 elo rating at tournament time control against kasparov. Uri
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.