Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: mistakes in the ssdf list

Author: Komputer Korner

Date: 13:13:50 10/20/98

Go up one level in this thread


On October 20, 1998 at 10:08:33, Amir Ban wrote:

>On October 20, 1998 at 01:16:06, blass uri wrote:
>
>
>>
>>The question is if hiarcs6 claimed a draw with making the last move.
>>If it is not the case it is a bug in hiarcs6(hiarcs6 knew that it was a draw
>>otherwise there was no chance for fritz3 to do a capture only in the 101 ply.
>>
>>Uri
>
>
>In auto232 games there is no agreed result, so some confusion about it may
>occur. In the DOS autoplayer, practically the only way to end a game is to stop
>playing, and let the game be terminated by a timeout. This means that when one
>program resigns or claims a draw, the other program only sees a timeout and can
>only guess what happened.
>
>In this case, it's possible that Hiarcs printed on the screen "It's a draw !",
>but continued playing anyway. Another possibility is that both programs realized
>this was a draw, but the tester who looked at the final position did not know
>this and thought Fritz won.
>
>Amir

Then a significant number of games may be called into question here. Those that
fit the draw? situation and those where the game is terminated because one
program knows it is losing in the opening. If the SSDF does not count these as
forfeits then this is SSDF madness and calls into question the whole idea of
autoplaying. One cannot separate the openings from chess unless you want to play
no book matches and how could anybody be sure that there is no hidden book.
--
Komputer Korner



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.