Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Isn't it an easy case?

Author: Gabor Szots

Date: 06:21:21 12/01/03

Go up one level in this thread


On December 01, 2003 at 09:14:41, Roger D Davis wrote:

>On December 01, 2003 at 08:01:28, Gabor Szots wrote:
>
>>If an engine is unable to claim draw on repetition, then it is not a draw if the
>>opponent plays on. Not a draw even if the same position repeats 10 times.
>>If the GUI claims the draw, it is as if a spectator would have claimed it,
>>therefore invalid.
>>
>>It seems to me that Jonny did not recognize draw because it accepted Shredder's
>>next move. In this case Shredder was EXTREMELY LUCKY, but nothing illegal or
>>unethical happened.
>>
>>I think it is unimportant that the GUI claimed the draw only when the position
>>had in fact repeated 3 times. In a human tournament, if I make my move, STOP THE
>>CLOCK, and call the arbiter, my draw claim is still valid. But without the claim
>>of the player himself, NOT EVEN THE ARBITER has to right to declare a draw. This
>>is what saved Shredder. An unlucky blow for the Fritz team.
>>
>>Gábor
>
>The Jonny author may well have chosen to let the interface catch the draw,
>rather than duplicate that functionality in his engine.

In human chess, am I allowed to tell my kibitz (or the arbiter) to warn me if
the position is a 3-fold repetition?

>
>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.