Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:21:32 11/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 30, 2003 at 19:46:08, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >On November 30, 2003 at 13:03:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>Here, the case was different. The computer said "I claim a draw". but the >>human chose to ignore that and keep playing. _that_ is not allowed. > >There is a difference here. The Fritz interface said 'there have been 3 >repetitions of position', not the Johnny engine. Supposedly, the engine didn't >know about the draw at all. Neither the engine or the interface actually >_claimed_ the draw, either. The interface and engine are _one_ in this event. What precise wording does the engine have to use to satisfy you? IE "the game is a draw due to 3-fold repetition" (which it said) or "I claim a draw by 3-fold repetition". I am unaware of any specific wording requirements. Just "this is a 3-fold repetition" is enough when I TD a tournament. I have even had players point at the board, hold up 3 fingers, and call me over. That's good enough. But enough of this trying to separate the engine from the GUI> We are talking about a "chess program" specifically here. Without the GUI it is not a chess player since it can't communicate. So trying to separate them doesn't fly. The ICGA let this nonsense happen when they chose to allow shared GUIs, and shared opening books, and so forth. They get exactly what they deserve as a result.
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.