Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 09:19:33 12/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 01, 2003 at 09:09:39, Matthew Hull wrote: >On December 01, 2003 at 00:56:26, Terry McCracken wrote: > >>On November 30, 2003 at 21:47:36, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On November 30, 2003 at 19:05:56, Terry McCracken wrote: >>> >>>>On November 30, 2003 at 12:45:13, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 30, 2003 at 11:50:12, Andreas Schwartmann wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I wonder what would have happened, if not Shredder was the one in favor of >>>>>>yesterday's break of rules, but e.g. List. In that case, the result of the game >>>>>>would have been overturned into the draw it really was. >>>>>> >>>>>>But ... when it comes to rules and when to cling to them, it's always a matter >>>>>>of understanding ... the dutch TD Hering did not really understand Johnny's >>>>>>operator's question ... maybe they should provide hearing aids next time ... The >>>>>>ICGA reminds me of the IOC ... incompetence and bias all the way. >>>>>> >>>>>>And: If not Fritz but Diep or Sjeng were to be denied the title of world >>>>>>champion in that way, there would be lots of protests against the decision to >>>>>>overrule Johnny's draw reclamation. But CB obviously did not mind, since >>>>>>Shredder and Fritz are both CB horses. >>>>>> >>>>>>That's sad. Shredder is NOT the legitimate champion. This tourney result is just >>>>>>a big joke. >>>>>> >>>>>>Andreas >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Did Shredder win the playoff? If so this is about the most ridiculous WCCC >>>>>final result I have ever heard of. >>>>> >>>>>By the way, calling this set of people/circumstances "incompetent" really >>>>>is an insult to all the really incompetent people around the world... I would >>>>>certainly be embarassed to claim the title "2003 WCCC champion" myself.. Had >>>>>I won it under these circumstances.. >>>> >>>>I can't believe you're saying this Robert, and I don't concur with your >>>>assessment. >>>> >>>>What would you have the ICGA do? >>>> >>>>The draw can't be ligitimized, by the FIDE rules, so why here? Jonny should have >>>>resigned much earlier and stopped this embarrassing situation from taking place. >>>> >>>>Terry >>> >>> >>>What in the name of heaven are you talking about? >>> >>>The program claimed a draw and told the operator what move it would make >>>to repeat the position. >>> >>>The computer is playing using blind chess rules, which means it has a human >>>proxy that relays its moves to the board. The rules _clearly_ say that if >>>the human makes a mistake, the game backs up to that point (of the mistake) >>>and resumes from that point. >>> >>>The point in that is obvious. This is a match between two computer programs, >>>communicating in the most stupid way possible because the ICCA simply refuses >>>to do as we have done in the CCT event and use automatic interfaces to eliminate >>>humans. The human _must_ do what the computer says do. This operator chose >>>to not do that. The game was a draw. There is no other conclusion that can >>>be reached according to the rules we have been using for computer chess >>>tournaments for 34 years... >>> >>>So your logic simply escapes me. You are mixing FIDE rules with computer >>>chess events. The two are not related. Computers can't make moves, call over >>>a TD, hit the clock, write the moves down, etc. So the rules were specifically >>>formulated to address that "difference". Except that the TD for this event >>>seems to have forgotten about it... >> >>Well if that is the case, then it wasn't the TD's fault or the ICGA, it was the >>operator's and the authors fault. It's that simple! >> >>I guess the ICGA should consider automatic interfaces. >> >>Things like this happen and in human tournaments as well, why get bent out of >>shape over it? > > >Because the software obtained and claimed a draw. Therefore the game is a draw. > The operator overruled the software and gave Shredder a 1/2 point which it did >not earn. The TD should not have allowed that. That's "taking a dive" to help >another program. The other participants were deprived of an honest result. All >their work, expense and honest effort were trample upon by this cheating. > >Worse, the Shredder team accepted this "gift" and used that to unjustly claim >their prize. > >That is shameful, IMO. > >Matt > > Oh no, I guess God will have to Smite them! Do you think I don't know all this and more? > > >> >>Put the blame where it lies, with the operator and author. >> >>If it's not an automatic call then after this screw up, I can hardly say Jonny >>drew nor would I give a draw in this case unless it was brought to my attention. >> >>Also Shredder had a 10.00 plus score and I believe a mate at the time, and why >>Jonny played on doesn't make sense. >> >>It's all too bad, but hey these things happen, from time to time. >> >>Don't you think that this gave concern for the ICGA as well? >> >>Terry
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.