Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Engine versus Interface claiming the draw...

Author: margolies,marc

Date: 15:10:15 11/30/03

Go up one level in this thread


No George, this has no analog to the LIST crafty plagiarism issue. Because no
one accused Jonny of using the fritz gui without attribution or permission. And
the operator of Jonny was available to anyone who wished to discuss the matter
with him. I doubt he would put his mother on the phone to avoid questions about
the dispute from the President of the International association hosting the
World Championship.




On November 30, 2003 at 14:39:41, George Sobala wrote:

>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.
>>
>>After all, a simple text GUI is written fast enough.
>>
>>Uli
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Roger
>
>I quite agree. In fact, is not the use of the ChessBase GUI a bit like having
>bits of Crafty in your code? Especially when it can handle openings, endings and
>draws!



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.