Author: Slobodan R. Stojanovic
Date: 15:40:46 06/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 21, 2003 at 17:59:30, Russell Reagan wrote: >On June 21, 2003 at 17:38:05, Slobodan R. Stojanovic wrote: > >>No Peter. I don´t know what was Uri´s idea. I suspect that it was reduce FRC >>name to Shuffle chess. > >I suspect you haven't payed attention to any of the threads in this post, >because Uri gives a correct solution to the problem you describe. > >>If we accept a participation of engines that don´t know how to do FRC castling, >>all comercial engines would try this status, they could create with the time an >>impression that castling is not necssary, because they win without castling, and >>compromete the FRC, REDUCING IT FINALY AT THE LEVEL OF SHUFFLE CHESS. >> >>It is a dangerour way for FRC fans, and noe we have to take an ideological >>decision about this problem. > >You are correct. If commercial engines correctly say that they play legal FRC >(which is already true), then your religious crusade would be less successful. ----------------------------------------------------- FRC fans shouldn´t allow participation of professional chess engines in FRC competiotions if they don´t know how to do FRC castling. This is the only way to protect FRC from mutilation and other agressions. In my opinion it is the principal condition for survival of FRC. SL.
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.