Author: Tony Werten
Date: 13:11:03 11/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 30, 2003 at 15:55:09, Matthew Hull wrote: >On November 30, 2003 at 14:10:45, Slater Wold wrote: > >>Is not so suspect... >> >>Johannes Zwanzger said that Shredder was clearly won, and that he did not want >>to 'steal the victory' from Shredder because of a stupid bug. THAT is why he >>did not get a TD, and kept playing. It was Johannes Zwanzger's choice, and no >>one else. > >No. It was the software's choice. That is "who" is playing the game. Ths >software claimed "draw". The operator overruled the claim, thus "taking the >dive", throwing the game. > >What incentive now has SMK to fix his bugs when his opponents all lay down and >play dead instead of hold his "bucket of bugs" to the test? If his software is >so good, why don't all operators simply resign or forfiet before the game even >starts in deferrence to Shredder's acknowledged superiority? > >Ridiculous!!! > > >> >>Shredder won. Period. > > >Fritz won. Period. Shredder accepted a gift 1/2 point which it did not earn. >Shameful!!! Although I agree with you on the first part, I have to disagree here. You can't blame Shredder for accepting the gift. Only the opponent for offering it and the TD for not correcting it. ( My opinion of coarse, as usual) Tony > >MH
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.