Author: Gerd Isenberg
Date: 10:47:44 11/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 30, 2003 at 11:50:12, Andreas Schwartmann wrote: >I wonder what would have happened, if not Shredder was the one in favor of >yesterday's break of rules, but e.g. List. In that case, the result of the game >would have been overturned into the draw it really was. Andreas, there was no draw! Even if the circumstances are a bit suspicious. Johann Zwanzger, programmer and operator of Jonny did't claim a draw, i guess because his engine had no clue about the 3-fold repetition! IMHO he had to stop the clock and to wait for TD and his decision. May be it was Stefan's fault as an experienced participant, not to demand Johann to do so. We don't know. Tatsachenentscheidung. But what about the protests if he claimed the draw not detected by his engine, but by a GUI which is part of the direct competitor of Shredder? Reputation may be a matter. If the rules are as they are, a bit unclear and interpretable, and the TD has the final word and as a human probably influenced by some prejudices... Do you remember 95 Paderborn, XXXX-CSTal? CSTal had mate in 3 or so, but the grafical chessboard paints a knight instead a queen after the final promotation and CSTal got mated therefore. May be a "random" bitflipper in the promotion drawing routine - in opposition of pv-window and logfile, where a queen promotion was reported, iirc. Jaap van der Herik decited that the grafical chessboard was right ;-) Most often Jaap's decisions are well founded and competent. It's not his job to become friend with everyone. ICGA and Jaap probably act a bit unlucky this year. About the "List"-case - no idea, only some rumors. Let's wait a few days until we get more information about it. Regards, Gerd <snip>
This page took 0.01 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.