Author: Thomas Mayer
Date: 17:09:08 12/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Rolf, >>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. That is not true -> The info box in Fritz arises AFTER the engine has made its decision about its move. (In that respect most if not all GUIs and engine do not handle it according to FIDE rules, Bob pointed that out several times). So Johannes did not play a fast move to hide things - instead he goes to the TD and wants to ask if it is allowed to play on anyway. The TD did not understand what he wants. When the TD finally thinks that it is maybe a good idea to go to the board the move was already played... It is definitely clear that Johannes was not aware of a) how in the tourney a draw must be claimed and b) how much influence is allowed to the operator - so he was not really aware of the "has to be passiv" rule. Simple facts. Maybe it was the case that Johannes was earlier near to resign the game for his engine but wants to play on a bit to compare his engines score a little bit longer to that of shredder, we do not know. (But I will ask him) And I am sure that also Stefan was unsure what this was all about - believe me, at that moment he spent thoughts on everything but for sure not on the rules. - And nobody was faced yet on such a tournament with such a situation... (I remember one game where XiniX did not manage to mate with 2 or even 3 queens - I think it lost finally on time - what would have happened if the opponent had resigned earlier ? I believe nobody would have complained either... especially when the engine itself would have resigned and not the operator...) > Cheating on Fritz and Junior BTW. Nope - he simply did not spent any thought on those two... You may not understand, but those tourneys are real stress situations - you are under pressure and in this case he must made a decision under pressure - he did search help from the TD but did not get any because of some misunderstanding. > 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. Believe me, SMK was thinking about TOTAL different things for that moment... this is also human... > 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. they have already said enough, Stefan at the tournament side and Johannes also there and in public in the CSS-Forum. > 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. There were some rumours that they want to do it... Somehow with the decision to count the game as a win for Shredder this has some logic. So once again: Johannes made a mistake. The TD should have corrected the mistake by declaring the game as a draw and inform Johannes about the mistake and that he is not allowed to overrule his engine in that way. Period. :) Greets, Thomas P.S.: And your writing style sucks because you say to everything that shows a different opinion than yours that the definition sucks. Stop that, it's arrogant.
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.