Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: change of opinion

Author: Sune Fischer

Date: 08:32:13 12/09/03

Go up one level in this thread


On December 09, 2003 at 11:22:03, Steffen Jakob wrote:

>On December 09, 2003 at 11:19:39, Sune Fischer wrote:
>
>>On December 09, 2003 at 10:18:44, K. Burcham wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>the program Jonny did not know that a 3 fold repetition is a draw.
>>>
>>>GCP
>>>
>>>Oh I see. this changes my opinion.
>>>so we can say that shredder nor jonny could see the draw.
>>>for what ever reason, code, bug, neither program could see draw, maybe in eval
>>>but neither program said "draw by repetition". maybe ok to play on. not sure.
>>>
>>>kburcham
>>
>>This is getting technical, more so than it has to be, I will try and explain.
>>
>>Chessabase, UCI and WB engines are different concerning a some minor details.
>>
>>In WB the engine has to do everything by itself, read the book, claim the draw
>>etc.
>>
>>In UCI there is no way the engine can claim a draw, there is no protocol command
>>available for the engine to do this.
>>
>>This is all documented and normal behavior, there is nothing here indicating
>>Jonny didn't behave according to protocol or was lacking in some way.
>
>Jonny is not a UCI engine. It is a winboard engine and used the winboard adapter
>from Chessbase.

Okay, then I guess he was lucky that it played as a UCI engine which fixed a
couple of holes.
Had he been playing as a winboard engine there would have been no argument from
me.

-S.

>>But all that tech stuff aside on who knew what and why, the crucial point
>>remains that Jonny managed to bring about a draw on the board and the operator
>>was allowed to overrule it only to face certain defeat.
>
>Greetings,
>Steffen.



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.