Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 09:52:49 12/08/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 08, 1999 at 12:10:03, Dan Ellwein wrote: >On December 07, 1999 at 21:21:48, Ricardo Gibert wrote: > >>On December 07, 1999 at 20:11:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On December 07, 1999 at 18:55:59, Chuck wrote: >>> >>>>On December 07, 1999 at 16:54:15, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 07, 1999 at 14:22:19, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On December 07, 1999 at 00:01:08, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On ICC, I often see computers winning games against strong players by >>>>>>>"unfriendly" means. Consider what happens when the position is dead drawn, >>>but the computer player does not realize this and makes an unending series of >>>>>>>aimless moves that drains the human opponent of time on his clock. It isn't >>>any secret that computers have "faster reflexes". This is boring and inflates >>>the apparent strength of the program. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I propose that computer programs should offer/accept draws when the following >>>>>>>conditions hold: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>1) There have been no pawn moves or captures played by >>>>>>> either side over the past 10 ply played. Of course >>>>>>> the 50 move rule counter is perfect for this. >>>>>> >>>>>>This is total nonsense. I have seen _many_ games where no pawn move or >>>>>>capture was played over a 5 move (10 ply) stretch. This has _nothing_ to >>>>>>do with the game called "chess". >>>>> >>>>>Please explain why you consider this to be total nonsense. It is clear that >this >is reliable indicator of whether substantive change has taken place on >the >chessboard. >>>> >>>>I'm afraid I have to agree with Ricardo on this issue. It is certainly true that >>>>alot of drawn games are won "inappropriately" by computers. Think for a moment >>>>of such a game (we've all seen them) and how you'd react if you were the human >>>>and some other human were on the other side of the board being so stupid. If it >>>>were I, I'd be upset. I'm sure we'd have words. I don't think it's enough to >>>>give computers the excuse that they can't recognize the draw. Our goal should be >>>>to make them recognize the draw first. And actually, in real tournaments these >>>>days you CAN do something about, you can claim your opponent has insufficient >>>>winning chances. This should be implemented in programs, in some way, and it may >>>>vary considering the program and it's eval. But it should be done, 1st because >>>>it's not really fair or right, but even moreso, because it's really poor >>>>etiquette. >>>> >>>>And as far as the game of chess goes, when I start a game, I expect both myself >>>>and my opponent to obey certain rules of etiquette. >>> >>> >>>And this includes your opponent looking over at the clock and saying "Hmmm... I >>>have 4 minutes left, my opponent has 15 seconds left, I suppose I ought to offer >>>him a draw..." >>> >>>That's never happened in any fast game _I_ have ever played, on a server or at >>>a club... >>> >>>You get that far behind, you lose... > >I agree... chess is not for the faint of heart... for that matter... neither is >life... - PilgrimDan This is a non-issue. If you don't like the feature, you can turn it off. >> >>That's fine. You can add another condition to cover this if you like. It does >>not invalidate the basic idea.
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.