Author: Gerd Isenberg
Date: 14:37:02 11/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 29, 2003 at 17:04:14, Dieter Buerssner wrote: >Another point would be, can any participant choose his GUI of choice? In all GUI >to engine protocols I know, this issue is not handled well. Some GUI might have >given the right message, that would convince the TD. Another GUI might have >failed to do this, parhaps all rather outside of the control of the engine. > >Note, I don't know the details of this specific case - so I also do not >necessarily argue in that context. Just in a more general context. Say 4 engines >use ChessHyper-GUI, that really does everything according to rules. That GUI >might even claim a draw, when the engine is not aware of it. Other engines might >use another GUU ... > >Regards, >Dieter Yes, and the interpretation of the rules implies the opportunity that an operator may overrule his program with the risk to loose in agreement with opponent operator. In this special case the risk to loose wath rather high. Another point is that the decisive draw-message came from a fritz-gui, as mentioned in the german CB-news, probably self-sufficient without asking the program, i don't know. There is even an national aspect with this issue. The german programmer Johann Zwanzger probably decided the WCCC due to mercy with the german programmer Stefan Meyer-Kahlen. Difficult situation for all parties concerned. At least future rules should clearly address and define 3-fold repetition handling. Only in cases where both programs disagree, the TD need to be involved, IMHO. Gerd
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.