Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 07:36:55 09/22/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 22, 2003 at 06:20:08, enrico carrisco wrote: >On September 22, 2003 at 04:22:56, Andrew Williams wrote: > >>On September 21, 2003 at 18:47:40, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On September 21, 2003 at 17:05:40, Andrew Williams wrote: >>> >>>>On September 21, 2003 at 16:51:19, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 21, 2003 at 16:46:27, Edward Seid wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I just wondered if there was a specific situation that occurred that caused >this rule to be implemented. Like who was involved and what happened. >>>>> >>>>>There were several accusations in the past tournament about >>>>>people overruling moves from their engines. At least one of the >>>>>people involved later admitted he manually interfered with the >>>>>time usage of the engine. >>>>> >>>>>PS. I don't think the current rules actually prevent this >>>>>either, which is why I'm not so hot about online tournaments. >>>>> >>>> >>>>Hi GCP, >>>> >>>>I agree that it's still possible to interfere, but it just makes it more >>>>difficult, which is the point, IMHO. Perhaps as a professional it's not >>>>"watertight" enough, but for the amateurs I think it is sufficient. >>>> >>>>Andrew >>> >>>The main problem was the fear that non programmers will participate. >>>This was the reason for the duty to kibitz. >>> >>>The fear that programmers will change the time management or the move of the >>>program is not the big problem because I think that in a lot of cases it is not >>>going to be productive. >>> >>>Personally I prefer to have a tournament when the programmers have the right to >>>change the move or the time management of the program but in case that they do >>>it the program needs to kibitz information about it. >>> >>>I think that it is going to be more interesting. >>> >> >>I really don't agree with this. I'm sure there is room for such a tournament, >>but CCT was originally designed as an online tournament for chess programs. Not >>for chess program + programmer intervention. That's a different sort of >>tournament. >> >>Andrew > >CCT is far from what is was originally designed for at this point (IMHO.) It >was originally a friendly tournament where programmers can meet one another and >converse while their programs perform. > >Now it is full of paranoia and 22.5 rules of engagement -- some acting like it >is Paderborn or WCCC. What happened to just having a good time without all of >the stress, conviction and stuffy guidelines? Save that crap for the official >tournaments. I'm just wating for the CCT entry fee next... > >-elc. Once someone has written an ICC-compatible program, it really is very little effort to make it "CCT-compatible". Andrew
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.