CCT 11: Games so far...

[Peter Aloysius]

It seems that CCT11 event is not stable and should never have been run in the 1st place, if such games can occure where the losing side should be awarded a win because of engine error or crash on the benefit of another engine..... It happened in previous event, and it still happens.
Should not the TD make sure such thing no longer occurs, as he is the one responsible, that everything runs smoothly ?
Such results give wrong impressions to the audience.

A lot of low seeded engine crash against a much weaker engine, but nobody ever demand the game repeated. Why this time is different? Oh, engine that crashed now is Rybka. ic.

[glorfindel]

It matters until you sign. After you have signed, it does not matter.

Yes, thanks, I think I agree. This makes the "signing" process very important for any proposed online WCCC, see my previous post, currently it is not sufficient as there is a possibility that it does not match intent, ie. it is putting a gun to the head of the "resigner".

I don't completely agree. The analogy with tournament chess is strong. You can also make an error there, by signing a scoresheet with the wrong result on it. You can lose a game you should have won there, too.

The moral is, be careful where you put your signature and be careful which buttons you press. Or alternatively you could have an interface which after pressing the resign button would ask you:
Are you sure you want to resign? Type "resign" to confirm.

[Nick C]

Are you sure you want to resign? Type "resign" to confirm.

Now that is a good idea. It would have made me stop and think. As it was I had a Kramnik/Fritz mate-in-1 experience. Hmm, even better would be, "the eval indicates that you have a won game idiot I am not resigning!!""

[Andres Valverde]

[quote="Peter SkinnerIn round 5, Scorpio had a mating score against who else, but Telepath. It froze, failing to mate and flagged on time. So due to Scorpio flagging and Telepath not having any mating material, the game was set 1/2-1/2 by the server:

[Event "CCT 11"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2009.03.21"]
[Round "5"]
[White "dshawul"]
[Black "Telepath"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ICCResult "White ran out of time and Black has no material to mate"]
[WhiteElo "1978"]
[BlackElo "2384"]
[Opening "QGD Slav: Dutch variation"]
[ECO "D18"]
[NIC "SL.05"]
[Time "15:00:47"]
[TimeControl "3000+3"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 dxc4 5. a4 Bf5 6. e3 e6 7. Bxc4 Bb4 8.
O-O Nbd7 9. Qe2 Bg6 10. e4 O-O 11. Bd3 h6 12. Bf4 Re8 13. Rfc1 Bh5 14. e5
Nd5 15. Nxd5 cxd5 16. Qe3 Nf8 17. Bb5 Nd7 18. Rc2 a6 19. Bd3 Qb6 20. Bxh6
Bxf3 21. a5 Qa7 22. gxf3 Rec8 23. Rxc8+ Rxc8 24. Kh1 Kf8 25. Qf4 b5 26. axb6
Nxb6 27. Rxa6 Qb7 28. Bg5 Ke8 29. Qg4 Kd7 30. Bb5+ Kc7 31. Ra1 Kb8 32. Ba6
Qa7 33. Qh3 Nc4 34. Qf1 Qxd4 35. Bxc8 Kxc8 36. b3 Qxe5 37. f4 Qc3 38. bxc4
Qf3+ 39. Qg2 Qc3 40. Rd1 Qxc4 41. f5 Qe2 42. Rc1+ Kd7 43. Qg3 Ba5 44. Qb3
Qe4+ 45. f3 Qb4 46. fxe6+ fxe6 47. Qc2 Qc4 48. Qg6 Qxc1+ 49. Bxc1 Bc3 50.
Ba3 d4 51. Qf7+ Kc6 52. Qxe6+ Kb7 53. Bc5 Bd2 54. Qd7+ Ka6 55. Qc6+ Ka5 56.
Qb6+ Ka4 57. Qa6+ Kb3 58. Qd3+ Bc3 59. Bxd4 Ka4 60. Bxc3 Kb3 61. Be5+ Kb4
62. Qb1+ Kc5 63. Bxg7 Kc6 64. Bf8 Kc7 65. Kg2 Kc6 66. Qb4 Kc7 67. Kg3 Kc6
68. Qa4+ Kc7 {White ran out of time and Black has no material to mate}
1/2-1/2
[/quote]

And we were lucky that Telepath had not even a single pawn. Otherwise it would had won. We have nothing to say, our system froze and we lost half point, period. We don't want to repeat the last move (mating) neither the whole game. Rules are rules and the TD does noting else than apply them.

Keep up the good work Peter!

[sje]

The TD decision to enforce the inadvertent resignation was correct. Failure to do so would have been unfair to all those participants who have made sure that their interface usage and programming would not lead to spurious data and commands being sent to a server.

Perhaps we have mistakenly approved specialization in computer chess program development. In the early days many chess programs were produced by teams, but each member of the team was nearly fully proficient in design, implementation, maintenance, and operation. That's no longer the case, and I think the field has suffered a bit as a result.

I'd say that a chess program with only a single author and with no dependence on others for an opening book, tablebases, operation, etc., has an advantage: the single author knows he has to make it work as there will be no one else to blame when things go sour.

[Graham Banks]

The TD decision to enforce the inadvertent resignation was correct. Failure to do so would have been unfair to all those participants who have made sure that their interface usage and programming would not lead to spurious data and commands being sent to a server.

Perhaps we have mistakenly approved specialization in computer chess program development. In the early days many chess programs were produced by teams, but each member of the team was nearly fully proficient in design, implementation, maintenance, and operation. That's no longer the case, and I think the field has suffered a bit as a result.

I'd say that a chess program with only a single author and with no dependence on others for an opening book, tablebases, operation, etc., has an advantage: the single author knows he has to make it work as there will be no one else to blame when things go sour.

Although the decision was technically correct, winning a lost game in such a manner wouldn't have given you much satisfaction though, I'd imagine.

[sje]

The TD decision to enforce the inadvertent resignation was correct. Failure to do so would have been unfair to all those participants who have made sure that their interface usage and programming would not lead to spurious data and commands being sent to a server.

Perhaps we have mistakenly approved specialization in computer chess program development. In the early days many chess programs were produced by teams, but each member of the team was nearly fully proficient in design, implementation, maintenance, and operation. That's no longer the case, and I think the field has suffered a bit as a result.

I'd say that a chess program with only a single author and with no dependence on others for an opening book, tablebases, operation, etc., has an advantage: the single author knows he has to make it work as there will be no one else to blame when things go sour.

Although the decision was technically correct, winning a lost game in such a manner wouldn't have given you much satisfaction though, I'd imagine.

Correct, just as I would have preferred a played loss to Diep in the fifth round than winning by unplayed forfeit when the operator showed up nearly an hour late.

[swami]

But I think that by "hitting enter" you signed the scoresheet.

Well if that was the case then intention really does have nothing to do with it as I didn't even read what I hit enter on. But yet you opened your reply to me by saying that intention does matter

Yes, I guess intention does play a part

so I'm confused, do you think that intention matters or not?

Why would I intend to resign in a won position? I would hope that anyone reasonable would guess that it was not intended.

Chess programs and interfaces have no soul. They "intend" nothing.

unless properly programmed/ properly tested the blame entirely lays on the team.

Rybka will win remaining games anyways, It was so much stronger against Bright. Completely outsearched simply leaving me with only hope of winning the game on disconnection.

[CThinker]

Let's move CCT11 event on Playchess Server, than we will see how many crashes will be there... My guess is none

Engines crash, and that is not the fault of the server. You can use any server you like, but if the engine is unstable, it will crash.

[CThinker]

Does anyone actually know what the FIDE rule is if a player accidentally knocks over his King and then does not follow up the "resignation" with a verbal commitment?

This is easy. I have recently followed a seminar for chess referees.

The resignation is only valid when you have signed the scoresheet. You may declare "I resign", you may shake hands with the opponent, but unless you have signed, you can keep playing.

Then I guess in an online tournament, when you send the 'resign' command, that is equivalent to your signature. The server logs your resignation and scores the game. The server terminates the game.

Chatting with your opponent and agreeing to resign would be similar to the human handshake.