On Mon, 2008-08-11 at 18:02 +0200, Erik van der Werf wrote: > On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Gian-Carlo Pascutto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > She was also a bit "unlucky" in the sense that Leela did not understand it > > was dead lost. > > > > I use quotes because had it understood better it was losing, it would have > > put up more of a fight :-) > > If Basti is correct that Leela resigned that would suggest that 'she' > actually did understand. > > For the final position in the game record any strong human player will > tell you that the game is clearly over. No points are left to be > gained and the result is obvious. If Leela had persisted in attempting > to push the opponent through the clock, then I guess any EGC referee > would have considered that 'unsportsmanlike' behavior (but it would of > course be nice to know for sure).
But is it really? Now instead of clearly defined rules, you enter the domain of judgment calls and these should be minimized. How clear does it have to be there is a win? Who decides where the gray area is? In chess it's been an important part of the game. You can get great positions if you spend a lot of time thinking and it's clear that is true in GO too. The longer I think, the better on average my position will be. But if I am less honest than my opponent about managing my time, why should I be given a free pass? I think the best thing is to use a Fischer clock with 1 or 2 seconds added per move and be religiously strict about honoring the rules. The rules I'm talking about, by the way, are the rules that you agreed to play by, before starting the game. The Fischer clock will protect you from unexpectedly long end games. Maybe it's just me, but I don't want my games judged. I don't want anybody saying that "you lose" even though my opponent used too much time. If you want to grant wins to the time loser, then instead of requiring someone to judge the result spell out the kinds of positions where the game should be stopped. If you cannot spell it out, then you have to judge it. - Don > > > >> As time was running out and the robot played obstinate moves, I told > >> the operator to kill it. However, it looked to me like he never > >> touched the keyboard, so when a dialog appeared, stating that > >> LeelaBot had resigned, I asked him if he had killed the robot, and he > >> replied he did not. > > > > The KGS server should have recorded the resignation instantly, but there > > is no sign of it in the game record. > > Some time ago I observed that kgsgtp does not tell my program that the > opponent has resigned (which is a bit annoying because it then keeps > pondering when the game is already over). It's a long shot but maybe > this behavior somehow also goes the other way around? > > Erik > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
