Author: Stephen A. Boak
Date: 19:59:53 08/16/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 15, 1999 at 16:35:49, Mark Young wrote: >On August 15, 1999 at 16:32:00, Paulo Soares wrote: > >>On August 15, 1999 at 15:24:58, Mark Young wrote: >> >>>On August 15, 1999 at 15:05:58, Paulo Soares wrote: >>> >>>>On August 15, 1999 at 10:16:03, blass uri wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>On August 15, 1999 at 08:14:37, Ed Schröder wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On August 15, 1999 at 04:55:23, Tania Devora wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Nice game Ed !!!! Rebel 10 are playing a very strong chess. Very solid. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I think that Mr Rhode has very much experience and he know very well how to >>>>>>>play against programs, he is a very good Grand Master too. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Congratulations Ed !!! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Rebel 10 Century ! I can't wait to see this program!!!! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Greetings! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Tania. >>>>>> >>>>>>Thanks. I hope GM Rohde will find some time to comment yesterdays game. But >>>>>>at the moment he is very busy with the Las Vegas event. Actually GM Rohde >>>>>>had no time at all to play Rebel but he still decided to help me out for >>>>>>August as I could not find a GM for that month. I like to take the >>>>>>opportunity now to thank him in public for that! >>>>> >>>>>I think that he did it for the 250$. >>>>>He wanted a fast draw because of this reason. >>>>> >>>>>I think that you should continue the game and not agree to draw after 38 moves. >>>>>I think that if GM's want a draw they have to play. >>>>> >>>>>The position is not a simple draw. >>>>>I tried some fast engine-engine games in my computer and there are chances for >>>>>both sides to win. >>>>> >>>>>I find it surprising that other GM's did not want the 250$ in August. >>>>> >>>>>I know that GM's are not rich people and they should be happy with 250$ or even >>>>>200$ for one day. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>>Uri, chess could have more followers if whole games finished in checkmate or in >>>>a very simple draw, but that is not our reality. >>>>In the final position of the game Rodhe x Rebel, I don't see chances for none >>>>of the sides. >>>> >>>>Paulo Soares >>> >>>I agree with Uri, You may be correct, and the draw offer and acceptance was >>>correct....But not before move 40 when Rohdes is very low on time. That is just >>>common sense to any chess player. Let him make time control, then you can do a >>>long think in the position....only then offer or accept a draw. I want to see >>>all the moves he is going to make in time pressure, Rebel had nothing to lose. >> >>Mark, the game finished with 38... .Qe5+, I don't believe that in that position >>Rohde needed more than 30 seconds to do two reasonable moves and draw. >>Paulo Soares > >Right only 30 seconds.....for two moves, Its only smart to want to see the two >reasonalbe moves. Any GM playing would not have given the draw yet...or any >other good chess player. If Ed Schroeder altered Rebel 10-5 to move faster when the Opponent is behind on time (I think he did this, from what I've read), then this was obviously in order to try to get an advantage (pressure the human to error) when the human was in time trouble. If this is true, why accept an early draw when the results of these alterations are almost paying dividends--actually have put the pressure on the human in time trouble? Somehow this seems inconsistent. On the other hand, I understand Ed's point about not respecting the GM or IM opponent. When moves are readily obvious to achieve time control without losing an even (and relatively uncomplicated) position, let's give the GM the doubt and accept the draw, instead of turning a mutually respectful game of wits into a possibly blunderful game of blitz chess. Ed isn't trying to test the GM and Rebel in blitz play, but rather to see if one or the other can fairly wrest the advantage and outplay the opponent at tournament time controls [We already know the strong chess programs can blitz better than virtually all GMs (I am not saying the programs will win *all* the games, mind you)]. If a game goes to nearly the first time control and neither has an edge, and the game is not full of interesting, non-symmetrical, dynamic possibilities, then a draw seems a fair result to offer and to accept at that time. I imagine such games, although they must occasionally be played out because one player believes he must win (for prize money, to avoid a tournament knockout, etc), are very boring to most GMs and IMs. If you are not seeking a win at all costs--perhaps when you face elimination from a match or tournament if you merely draw), why not accept the draw rather than subject the opponent to the demeaning 'prove that you are a GM and can see the obvious under time pressure' rejection of the draw offer. SUGGESTION--I would notify the candidate contestants in advance (when soliciting their challenges) that Rebel has been programmed to take advantage, if possible, of a human opponent's time trouble and the candidate can sometimes expect the computer team to play out the game at least until the first time control has ended. One of the Rebel goals has been to make the program play like a human. It seems to me that this also involves playing out a time trouble situation in order to try to wrest a permanent advantage from the opponent in time trouble. This should not be offensive to an opponent, especially if announced in advance. I can agree with Ed that winning is not everything, especially if you are trying to encourage GMs to play your computer under slow time control, match conditions, in order to properly develop and rate your program's play. However, doesn't the offer of a prize compensate the opponent for making him play out the first time control? Should the opponent *expect* that he need only hold an even position until just prior to the 40th move (maybe move 36-38) and the Rebel Team will automatically accept a draw offer despite the opponent's time trouble, and pay him $250 for a draw without battling tooth and nail to the wire (the first time control)? Bottom line, if Ed wants to pay $250 for the draw, on move 38 or so, that's his team's decision. I can't fault him for trying to maintain a good working relationship with GMs and IMs. --Steve Boak
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.