Author: James B. Shearer
Date: 16:22:26 10/03/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 03, 1999 at 14:11:38, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:
>On October 03, 1999 at 12:25:09, James B. Shearer wrote:
>
>>On October 03, 1999 at 11:52:43, Howard Exner wrote:
>>
>>>On October 03, 1999 at 09:17:38, Georg v. Zimmermann wrote:
>>>
>>>>The game against Hoffmann should _of course_ be counted. Say what happens if I
>>>>play a game with a cold in a tourniament ?
>>>
>>>
>>>This is not quite the analogy that comes to mind. A computer that shorts out, or
>>>has a power failer is more like a person having a total stroke or blackout
>>>during the game - or maybe having someone bonk you over the head causing an
>>>unconscious state.
>>>
>>>Or course if you are concerned about the game score then of course even
>>>someone dying at the chess table will not matter. But in the GM challenge
>>>the point is seeing how a computer program plays vs a human. Otherwise we may
>>>find ourselves with a rash of posts, "I beat Crafty in 10 moves!" When asked
>>>by the enquiring minds here on CCC, "How did you do that?", you could
>>>simply reply, "The power went out in my house, it refused to move so it
>>>lost on time! Yipee my rating just shot up!"
>>
>> Rebel did not lose on time.
>> Obviously the game should count.
>
>- Rebel played 2 moves in the Hoffman game that can not be reproduced. If Rebel
>had won, the victory wouldn't count. Should the game count only because Rebel
>lost?
The game should count if rebel loses for the same reason it shouldn't
count if rebel wins. The purpose of the rule is to guard against operator
intervention.
James B. Shearer
PS: Btw while this seems to have been declared a hardware problem I have seen no
convincing proof.
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.