Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 05:39:11 12/18/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 18, 2003 at 08:15:52, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On December 18, 2003 at 07:50:13, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>Yeah, and now you're starting the whole thing up again. > >I blame Rolf :) Yeah but who feed the troll...? ;-) >>In any case one shouldn't suddenly go about making up rules in the middle of >the tournament: "Oh BTW you can't claim a draw because you are using an >>interface that does it for you...." >>This should have been said _before_ the tournament. > >The rules are actually made up during the players meeting (I dislike _THAT_ >certainly a lot). > >You are also saying something completely different than I am. I am saying >that I consider the reasoning defensible. I did not say that every engine >HAS to claim the draw by itself, even when the interface was designed to do >that. > >Can you understand the difference? Yes I can see the difference. You think the operator should be allowed to overrule his engine, but I don't like this human factor in computer chess. It seems Jonny saw the draw and wanted it. I anticipate your objection here, so I'm just going to add: it didn't understand a three-fold, but it understands two-folds which includes three-folds. But we've already been over this a few 1000 times ;) >Jonny is a winboard engine btw :) True, but acting like a UCI engine and thus subject to the same rules, IMO. >>You would never expect team Fritz or anyone else to appeal such a decision. >>IMO they risk losing too much prestige over that. > >Well, they _know_ they get the world title if they do. > >I don't know about other programmers, but I'd certainly appeal a decision >if I thought it was nonsense. C'mon, the Fritz team wouldn't get a lot of sympathy with that behavior, not many spectators understand how big an issue bugs are in this game. Besides at that point they probably still considered themselves favorites to win the playoffs. >>The TD's decision wasn't right just because no one appealed, you can't use that >>as indicator at all, I'm quite sure some of the other teams must have frowned >>quite a bit over that decision. > >That is true - funnily enough Amir Ban had the most issues with it. Yes he doesn't have alterior motive so he can speak freely :) >>>Most of the 'problems' in that decision seem to be the people who have >>>a personal axe to grind with the ICGA and seem to think this was a nice >>>opportunity to show their know-it-all skills. >> >>Sorry, you can't undermine my arguments _that_ easily. :) > >It was meant towards the people that you can't seem to sanely argue with >over this matter :) Oh, so I'm in the sane category now? wohoo :) -S.
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.