Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: no claim, no draw (etc.)

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 01:07:38 12/25/03

Go up one level in this thread


On December 25, 2003 at 03:27:02, Mike S. wrote:

>On December 24, 2003 at 21:41:09, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>
>>>>>>(...)
>
>>NOPE Mike! That a 3-fold, once you notice it, is a draw, this is NOT something
>>special for computerchess, but for human chess and from there it was taken to
>>computerchess.
>
>You certainly know (?) that a 3-fold is *not* automatically a draw once one
>notices it, but *only when claimed* It doesn't have to be a draw. The same goes
>for the 50 move rule. The only "must" draw like that is stalemate :-)
>
>When I'm (otherwise) *winning*, i.e. a rook up etc., and my opponent forces a
>perpetual, I won't claim a draw of course. Still, I may take notice of it. But
>it makes no sense to claim. Also, I *don't have to claim* (of course independent
>from who's better). If the opponent misses it - his business. That's how it
>actually really is in chess in general (I don't quite know what else you are
>talking about).
>
>I guess you may assume, all computerchess programs would be so foolish to claim
>the draw against themselves then in a situation like above, but that's not true
>either.

No
I do not think that chess programs are foolish by claiming draw every time they
can do it based on a 3 time repetition.

The point is that every 3 time repetition can be claimed by both sides.
It is logical to assume that the opponent does not do some mistakes(otherwise
programs will never resign).

For chess programs I assume that the mistake of not claiming a draw by 3 time
repetition is a mistake that they do not do.

If I play against opponent that does not do the mistake of not claiming a draw
by 3 time repetition then I can lose nothing by claiming a draw everytime that I
can do it based on 3 time repetition because in that case the fact that the
opponent did not claim a draw proves that it is good for me to claim a draw(or
alternatively if it is my move and I consider if to claim a draw based on
reptition after the move that I plan then I can be sure that if not claiming a
draw is good for me the opponent will claim a draw immediately after my move).

I do not care about the case when I play against an opponent that does the
mistake of not claiming a draw by 3 time repetition because this opponent is a
usually an human and the tournament is a computer tournament.


 I definetely know Nimzo 2000 (own GUI) doesn't claim such draws when 0.5
>would be lost by it so to speak.

How can it lose 1/2 points by it?
It only can lose it by a bug.

A program with no stupid bugs cannot get into 3 time reptition from a winning
position and if the original position is a draw then it does not lose 1/2 point
by it but only lose some chance that the opponent will go wrong.



 I guess Fritz in serious rating game mode will
>behave the same, but I didn't test that.

Fritz in a serious rating mode will not get into a 3 time repetition from a
winning position if it has no serious bugs.

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.