Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:44:53 12/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 09, 2003 at 21:29:03, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On December 09, 2003 at 09:46:17, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On December 09, 2003 at 07:36:14, Darse Billings wrote: >> >>> >>>I have been asked to contribute my views regarding the Shredder vs >>>Jonny game in Graz. (I was in Graz during the WCCC, and I've been >>>involved in similar 3-fold repetition situations in the Computer >>>Olympiad. FWIW, I have the highest arbiter certification awarded >>>by the Chess Federation of Canada: National Tournament Director.) >>> >>> http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=1335 >>> >>>This is an interesting situation, but the ruling was entirely correct. >>> >>>The actual circumstances made the decision clear. Anyone who cannot >>>see this needs to check their logic or their knowledge of the rules. >> >>What exactly are you basing this on. I am going by this: >> >>"If the operator types in an incorrect move, the TD must be immediately >>notified. Both clocks will be stopped. The game must then be backed up >>to the point where the error occured. ..." >> >>That seems clear >> >>Another rule: >> >>"An operator can only (1) type in moves and (2) respond to request from >>the compute for clock information." >> >>How can you claim that an operator refusing to make a claim displayed by >>the program is "OK"? > >This issue is a red herring. It doesn't matter if it is okay or not. The >operator of jonny wanted to refuse the draw so shredder could win i.e. he was >trying to throw the game. Totally illegal of course. > We obviously agree. But apparently this can't be restated often enough to sink in for everyone reading.
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.