Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 16:29:43 12/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 21, 2003 at 18:41:35, Uri Blass wrote: >On December 21, 2003 at 17:32:16, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On December 21, 2003 at 11:13:52, Thomas Mayer wrote: >> >>>Hi Rolf, >>> >>>[I snip your nonsense because you simply does not want to understand] >>> >>>But I may add that one of the rule is that if something is not declared in the >>>rules FIDE rules will be taken... Thats the point how the TD explains his >>>decision... >> >>But the passivity "rule" means what? Did Zwanzger violate that rule? With the >>bad intention to avoid that rule and hence he cheated. It's so simple. > > >I do not support Zwanzger actions but I do not think that I can define his >actions as cheating because I use that word for worse things. Uri, I dont regard Johannes as a cheater in the sense of being a criminal or some such. But I cant see why you want to avoid the term cheating. I will come back to that below. > >1)Zwanzger did not lie about the facts. Seems so. I never implied other. >2)He did not try to hide the facts. Objection. He's a good chessplayer and he worked around the 3-fold in making a fast move, hoping that then - like in human chess - the drw could no longer be set. But here he was wrong. Bob Hyatt has described the tradition in computerchess. The TD takes back the further moves and orders play from the position then. But that is a 3-fold and therefore a draw. This is very trivial and I dont understand why the tricky play with another move shouldn't be called cheating. Cheating on Fritz and Junior BTW. >3)I am not sure if he knew the rules of computer chess that the operator has to >be passive as much as possible. Here we have an interesting problem because in computerchess the operators are allowed to talk with one another - other than in human chess. Here SMK could easily have explained the rules to Zwanzger but he apparently wasn't interested in correcting his false view, if it ever was one false view. Please understand why I am so angry at this man. He's an extremely good chessplayer. And he knows for sure that the 3-fold is always a sort of lucky exit for the losing party. He valued the "bug" in Shredder as sort of unfair disadvantage in comparing Shredder with Fritz and Junior. This is nonsense. Because bugs have decided tournaments in all the history of computerchess. Also here Stefan normally should have informed the young guy. With his Elo of 1950 Stefan is also strong enough to understand the chess rule of the 3-fold. So I hope you see what I mean, Uri. The actual presentation of the facts sucks. It is about a TD who doesn't understand comme il faut, but we hear nothing from the players involved. <No, Uri, this is all a big mess. > >I see cheating as lying about the facts or hiding important facts and it was not >done in this case by Zwanzger. Therefore I didn't mean the term as if Zwanzger now were a terrible criminal but Uri, take this, I wouldn't have been surprised if the TD would have disqualified the operator for his cheating. He intentionally threw a game. He had the draw in his hands. And the machine told him that it saw the draw. > >I define a player or an operator as a cheater if he tries to claim something >that is simply a lie or tries to hide important information. Of course he didn't do that. Other than Stefan who hid certain facts to the eyes of the young J. Zwanzger. > >Examples in human chess are when a player claim that he did not touch or did not >left a piece because of wanting to win when he knows that it is a lie. > >In computer chess it can be playing a different move than the move that the >program suggests because the operator knows that the move that the program >suggests is a losing move and he hopes that nobody will notice. Yes. That didn't happen. But your definition also sucks because you define it to already known aspects. But here something happened that was not known before. It was all happening because Zwanzger as a master player / operator suddenly believed he could play "God" in the final decision for the tournament winning. Without his cheat Fritz would have been winner of the Wch!! You seem to overlook this. Rolf > >Uri
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.