Author: Mridul Muralidharan
Date: 17:38:22 02/12/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 12, 2005 at 17:30:49, Rafael Peña wrote: >Hello! > >After seeing the official resul vs crafty, i've decided take out my program from >CCT7. > >here are my reason: > >1.- The game vs crafty, both engines says draw (look the position, and score >from crafty and fafis). >2.- Crafty offer several times draw to Fafis. >3.- Fafis accepted the draw and i Communicated to the chanel 64 on ICC. >4.- Arena (debug window) and Fafis put in their log draw by mutual agrement. >5.- 10 min later , TD says that Fafis lost on time. > >Is a good tourney and excellent organitation, but i'm not agree with this >choice, i lost the game vs zappa because i have not internet conetion at home, >so is my fault, but i don't see why the game is lose by fafis vs crafty, i think >the tourney it's for fun or somebody is going to win money?. > >I'm not sure is if Arena bug or ICC bug as some people said, i think the >decision is based on what happened (that is my 5 reasons), TD said that is based >on ICC log. > >Some people said in a bad way that i'll be in a black list for leave the >tourney, i think, i said in a very polite way to td that i was leaving out the >tourney, and i made appologies to all people in cct7. > >I don't going said more about this, also i don't think aswers replies here, just >i'm posting here with my reason. > >GL on CCT7. >Rafael Peña >Program. Fafis Forgetting the namecalling in the thread's below , let us consider one thing. However well you program - there will be bugs : that has become like an almost accepted truth. Now , bugs in search , eval - we cant help ... Bugs which cause a crash (due to say a parameter not getting set) , n/w conn aborting - we _allow_ : hence the 'n' number of reconnects , 'x' number of mins per reconnect , etc. Are they also not bugs ? Cant we not just arbitrarily say "Too bad , if you hit your bug , you lose - your bug , your butt." , etc ? Saying it is to be automated , and so you absolve all responsibility is pretty much stupid . Let me explain why : We all know what great job Leo Dijksman , others are doing - do we really need a tourny like CCT ? If Leo says everything has to be automated - I can understand - he manages them himself ! Even then , I see that sometimes he decides matches , etc if there is some mistake , etc (Great job Leo ! :) ) If everything is to be automated , then why have an event like CCT7 ? Wont these tourny's not be enough ? Ofcourse we do need them , since we need people and authors to get together , chat up , pass comments on innocent "Anzar" (which was cool , btw ;) ) , swap ideas , etc. It is also a social event in a "virtual" way :) To "help" us in organising the event , we need to automate as much as possible ! So that we can have a good time together , so that everyone will not be manually relaying moves , we can all look at each others games , evals ; bitch about life and in general have a fun time even when your program is getting thrashed senselessly. Bottomline is , it is a fun event - serious , but fun. The automation is a means to this end - not the end in itself ! So , if it is in the spirit of things to accept a draw - WHEN IT IS A DRAW ! and was offered by crafty , accepted by Faffis , relayed WELL IN ADVANCE to 64 (time wise) , when the intent and motives are not suspect when the draw was declared , then why this fuss ? We are after all humans , and more importantly , programmers and program users. We know how shit programs can be , and in this case, it looks like it was not even the programmers fault , but arena's ! When we can , cant we not make life little easier for others ? Do we need to shackle overselves in our own rules so that we make our life less enjoyable ? It is definitely required to obey the law , but in its spirit - need not necessarily be in its letter. I felt today , we were nitpicking to not give the draw ... Nobody said the draw call was with bad motivations , nobody said it was not a draw , crafty offered the draw. Faffi's author might have done lot of wrongs : a) Did not check if game was still going on. b) Did not check if server status changed. c) Did not spend the last 2 years or last 2 days checking up things properly in ICC , read the rules , bylaws, constitution , the entire help manual's , etc. But are they really that relevent to this case ? Vaguely - yes , would have definitely helped him more , but is this really that bug a crime ? Uri kept cribbing that SOS was not kibbing - is this violation of the rule ? My program sometimes does not kib if a suddent move response for a ponderhit - is this violation of the rule ? Shouldn't these games also not be kicked out ? But then we say , it is in the spirit ,etc , etc. Wont this entire issue not fit in the same mould in a more general sense ? I for one , definitely felt that it could be overlooked this and avoided such a sorry incident .... Until then cct7 was running surprisingly well and smack on schedule ! Ofcourse , leaving tourny was a hotheaded decision - something I cant agree with , but definitely something I would have done too IF I was in the authors position. Now that the decision is made and the mess created , we can discuss it (note "discuss" :) ) , learn from it and avoid such sorry incidents in future ! My 2 cents. Mridul PS : Unilateral decisions are never good. I liked the basic idea of the seeding , but ... :)
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.