Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 11:53:44 11/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 30, 2003 at 14:36:02, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >On November 30, 2003 at 14:11:15, Roger D Davis wrote: > >>I'm reading now that the Fritz interface claimed the draw, but the Jonny engine >>did not, and apparently some people feel this is an important point. But I think >>it's irrelevant. Perhaps the Jonny author didn't worry about detecting threefold >>repetitions because he knew the Fritz interface would do it for him. That's a >>FEATURE of the interface, right? > >IMHO, on occasions like this it should be required that any program uses its own >GUI. Commercial GUIs support use of commercial books, which is doubtful. Some >GUIs even don't call the engine in case of 5-piece root nodes but do the table >base access themselves. A draw reclamation by the GUI must be ignored; imho the >TD had decided correctly. They allowed Jonny to use the CB-GUI which is of course doubtful. The chessbase GUI handles opening book and TB-access as well. Should Jonny also have ignored all opening and TB moves from the GUI? I don't think the decision of the TD was logically consistent. Michael > >After all, a simple text GUI is written fast enough. > >Uli > > >> >>Roger
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.