Author: Thomas Lagershausen
Date: 08:37:18 12/27/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 27, 2005 at 11:33:40, Uri Blass wrote: >On December 27, 2005 at 11:22:36, Daniel Mehrmannn wrote: > >>On December 27, 2005 at 09:28:02, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>I wonder why the fruit operator agreed to early draw against isichess. >>> >>>public Fruit evaluates the final position as more than +3 for white >>> >>[...] >> >>Hello Uri, >> >>I think you should accept this handling by the operator, because: >> >>1. You don't have the same Hardware >> >>2. You don't have the same version and you don't know the changes. >> >>3. You don't see IsiChess score and you're not in the hall (live). >> >>4. You can't only compare Fruit 2.2.1 analyses (missed IsiChess here). >> >>If you really completly disagree with the draw maybe ask Fabien if you could >>overtake the operator part of Fruit :) >> >>Best, >>Daniel > >You are right but >I do not claim that fruit could win but only that it had practical chances to >win and I am disappointed from the fact that the game did not continue(operators >could not know the future moves of the game without playing them and if we >ignore winning on time only draw and win for white seem to be possible) > >I also do not claim that the computer moves that I give are forced. > >Uri It was a clear draw. To continue such a game is not very gentle. It is a happy day that you are not a operator in paderborn. TL TL
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.