Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Does your program understand castling/en passant rights on 3x repetition

Author: Albert Silver

Date: 11:12:02 02/27/00

Go up one level in this thread

On February 27, 2000 at 10:52:43, Manfred Schubert wrote:

>>>I do not know about cases when it practically happened in games.
>>I disagree. These are basic chess rules and if the program does not recognize
>>this, then it is not properly compliant to the game. How is 'low probability'
>>going to justify a program declaring a position drawn when it is not? I don't
>>think one can go about choosing which rules of chess the program will respect or
>>not. In any case, I have seen a case with two masters playing in which one
>>player was given a warning for declaring a draw improperly.
>>                                       Albert Silver
>There is a difference between detecting it in the search tree (which is not very
>important because it is not very probable) and claiming draw too early in the
>move list (where there is enough time to apply the correct rules).

True, and Uri said he thought the knowledge (there was no mention of this being
only subject to detection in the search) was unimportant as there was a 'low
probability' of this taking place. Personally, I don't care if the program
detects it in the search or not, but I do care if it declares the game a draw
incorrectly. Furthermore, even if the program does not refuse to play after
declaring the 'draw', what will happen when a real case of 3-fold repetition
takes place later in the game?

                                       Albert Silver


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.