TalkChess.com

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
It is you and Harm that miss the point, not me.

You are hopeless, but that doesn't come unexpected.

whereagles wrote:Who knows what would have happened if they had it disabled?

Or better yet, what would've happened if Houdini had used 6-men Nalimov, instead of syzygy?

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:Specifically, for queen vs 2 bishops, the article says:
Queen versus two bishops: A queen has a theoretical forced win against two bishops in most positions, but the win may require up to seventy-one moves (a draw can be claimed after fifty moves under the rules of competition, see fifty-move rule); there is one drawing fortress position for the two bishops

So, it is a win, but the engine 100-plies counter gets it as a draw.

Wrong. The article says the position is a draw, because no mate or winning conversion can be forced within 50 moves.

That the Queen can capture both Bishops already on the first move by jumping over them if this had been Japanese Checkers is not very relevant.

It seems you do not understand the rules of Chess.

The position is clearly drawn by FIDE rules. So the result should be changed.

If TCEC wants to deviate from FIDE rules to count cursed wins as real wins then that should be explicitly written in the rules. But personally I'd prefer to stick with FIDE rules.

Actually they did write in the rules explicitly that the 50-move rule does apply.

zamar wrote:The position is clearly drawn by FIDE rules. So the result should be changed.

If TCEC wants to deviate from FIDE rules to count cursed wins as real wins then that should be explicitly written in the rules. But personally I'd prefer to stick with FIDE rules.

Correct.

Computerchess should be played under the gerneral chessrules according to the FIDE.

The result of the game is a draw.

hgm wrote:Actually they did write in the rules explicitly that the 50-move rule does apply.

they also wrote that Cutechess adjudicates automatically tablebase positions. what is the main rule and what the secondary one?

I guess a won position is simply won, and the end position is won. FIDE rules concerning 50-moves draw is definitely a remnant from the past, and should be changed, the sooner the better. Also, it is not clear to me why should engine competitions follow FIDE rules. The 50-moves rule is FIDE-valid, simply because humans get tired after very long games and, most importantly, because years ago, when this specific FIDE rule was written, computer analysis still did not prove there are plentiful positions theoretically won for the stronger side without captures or pawn moves only after move 50. As seen in the wikipedia article I referenced, there are ta least several hunder theoretically won pawnless endgames after move 50, and they do happen frequently enough. (we have see this at TCEC at other times too)

So, what should be done, is for a specific engine protocol to change the 50-moves rule to a larger number, at least 100, maybe referring only to specifically known tablebase positions. The 50-moves rule migth hold true for any other case(not to make the game too long), but, in the case of a known tablebase position, the rule might be changed to 100 moves.

For example, if pawnless endgame (where primarily those positions occur) and tablebase win, 50-moves rule=2*50-moves rule. Not difficult to do, is it?

They gave the SYZYGY to the engine. The SYZYGY follow the FIDE ruler.

But they gave the GAVIOTA to the GUI. The GAVIOTA don't follow the FIDE ruler.

The GAVIOTA has the wrong data. It is the bug. They must give the same to engine and to GUI.

They say they follow FIDE 50 move rule. They must give SYZYGY to the GUI.

Game is draw by TCEC rules. GAVIATO is WRONG. TCEC judge is WRONG.

Rochester wrote:They gave the SYZYGY to the engine. The SYZYGY follow the FIDE ruler.

But they gave the GAVIOTA to the GUI. The GAVIOTA don't follow the FIDE ruler.

The GAVIOTA has the wrong data. It is the bug. They must give the same to engine and to GUI.

They say they follow FIDE 50 move rule. They must give SYZYGY to the GUI.

Game is draw by TCEC rules. GAVIATO is WRONG. TCEC judge is WRONG.

the end position is won for white. why adjudicate a won position as draw?

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:

Rochester wrote:They gave the SYZYGY to the engine. The SYZYGY follow the FIDE ruler.

But they gave the GAVIOTA to the GUI. The GAVIOTA don't follow the FIDE ruler.

The GAVIOTA has the wrong data. It is the bug. They must give the same to engine and to GUI.

They say they follow FIDE 50 move rule. They must give SYZYGY to the GUI.

Game is draw by TCEC rules. GAVIATO is WRONG. TCEC judge is WRONG.

the end position is won for white. why adjudicate a won position as draw?

Need the 72 moves for faster mate. But the FIDE and the TCEC has the 50 move ruler. The GAVIOTA has the bug: tt don't know the 50 move ruler.

You say you want change the rule. But the rule is the rule. No exception on 50 move rulers any more. Long time ago, yes. Now no.

TCEC rule not say "GUI ask to Lyudmil".