Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:33:54 02/12/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 12, 2005 at 19:43:57, Christian Koch wrote: >On February 12, 2005 at 19:39:05, Andrew Williams wrote: > >>On February 12, 2005 at 19:27:33, Christian Koch wrote: >> >>>On February 12, 2005 at 19:22:41, Andrew Williams wrote: >>> >>>>On February 12, 2005 at 19:16:59, Christian Koch wrote: >>>> >>>>>Would be good if the TD could show us the logfile from the server to explain >>>>>what was really going on.... >>>> >>>>What "logfile from the server"? Do you mean a log of channel 64? Or do you mean >>>>a log from the server? I don't think Peter will easily be able to get the >>>>latter. >>>> >>>>Andrew >>> >>>I mean a log or logfife or something else where all readers can reconstruct the >>>decision from the TD. Hard to understand? >> >>It's hard to understand where you think that is going to come from. >> >>Andrew > >Okay, back to the basics: What was the basis to rule for Crafty in this game? 1. The programs must play with an _automatic_ interface. This puts the chess server (ICC) in the role of "referee". ICC handles validating moves, keeping up with the clock for time forfeits, and so forth. Therefore, there really was no decision to be made, ICC said the game was lost on time. 2. Apparently there was some operator interaction in the draw claim process, although I didn't see much of the discussion and others can probably provide more details. But the CCT rules are clear that the programs are responsible for playing games, offering/claiming draws, and so forth. The human operators and the TD are not part of the game, the TD only runs the tournament, handles the pairings, and so forth. He doesn't watch the games to see who does what to whom, he just records the results as reported by the ICC chess server.
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.