Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 18:14:51 04/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On April 21, 1999 at 12:14:45, KarinsDad wrote: >Great. This explains computer vs. computer. > >There are still a few grey areas I suspect. For example, FIDE put into effect >the rule that both sides need not make all 50 moves in order to claim a draw by >the 50 move rule, the claiming side need make only 49 moves. However, if one >computer claims the 50 move rule based on 99 moves and the other denies it, I'm >sure the tournament director in an ICCA tournament can handle this. I have no idea if there is a sanctioning body for computer vs human games. There is no computer - human title so perhaps none is needed. At AEGON the rules used were a little different than the rules at ICCA tournaments. I eventually figured out that they were pretty relaxed about how you could set your clock. I believe you could change your clock and your time per move in any way you wanted, but I'm not sure. Also, the operator was responsible for offering draws, accepting draws, and resigning, there was no need to get permission from the tournament director. >What is the governing body for computer vs. human? I assume it would be based on >the tournament (i.e. USCF rules in a USCF tournament, etc.). If this is the >case, then how does one make sure that their program obeys all of the rules? Do >most programs have "variant rules" programmed into them so that the operator can >pick and choose which rules are applicable to a given tournament? And what >happens with down time in a human versus computer game in non-ICCA events? I don't think anyone has gotten this serious yet. >And how do discrepancies get handled on the chess servers such as ICC? ICC operates by its own rules, which aren't FIDE, USCF, or ICCA rules. bruce
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.