Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 03:31:38 07/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 18, 2000 at 23:35:14, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 18, 2000 at 22:54:22, Jorge Pichard wrote: > >>On July 18, 2000 at 19:38:14, Jerry Adams wrote: >> >>>On July 18, 2000 at 18:18:30, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>> >>>>Most people are ignoring the fact that what Mr Amir has accomplished with his >>>>Deep Junior program three years after Deep Blue defeated Kasparov, is not an >>>>easy task. Three years has passed by, in which most GMs have had plenty of >>>>practices using Anti-Computer Knowledges, since Kasparov last played Deeper Blue >>>>II in 1997. If Deep Blue was still available and confronted the same GMs that >>>>were in Dortmund it would have not score as good as Deep Junior. Mainly for >>>>these reasons. >>>> >>>>1. More Anti computer knowledges is known now than back in 1997. >>>> >>>>2. None of the GM would have played an open game against, knowing its great >>>>tactical abilities and calculating power. >>>> >>>>3. Deep blue would have played against different type of opponents with >>>>different styles, which make it harder for Deep Blue team such as: Hsu and >>>>GM Nick de Firmian who prepared special opening lines against GM Kasparov. >>>> >>> >>> >>> I think what you are forgetting is the fact that against Deepblue there is no >>>such thing as Anti computer chess, even Kaspy himself admitted that. I think >>>Deepblue would have performed better than Deepjr. the question for me is how >>>much better? Kaspy tried to close the position when he choose the Ruy Lopez >>>against Deepblue, but Deepblue simply outplayed him!! >>>> >> GM - Nick de firmian author of MCO-14 and who worked with the IBM Team as the >>specialist who prepared Deep Blue's special opening moves for its two victories >>explained on his introductory of his latest Modern chess Opening that Kasparov >>played much worse than usual, trying faulty Anti-computer strategy when he would >>likely have won by normal play. Later on on page 87 of his MCO 14th Edition he >>explained that on the second game where Kasparov's lost to deep Blue Deep Blue >>emerged with a large opening advantage (before it even began to think" ) which >>put kasparov in a hole. In that game Kasparov using the closed defense of the >>smylov variation faced a prepared opening by De Firmian where deep Blue vs >>Kasparov played 19.a4 Nh4?1 20. Nxh4 Qxh4 21.Qe2 Qd8 22.b4 Qc7 23.Rec1 c4 >>24.Ra3 Rec8 25.Rca1 +- and white won in 45 moves. As I explained in 3. > > >I am not sure what he is talking about here, but if you look at the log file, >DB was out of book before it played move 17 in round 2. Is he saying that >DB had prepared analysis through at least 24 moves? The log file definitely >refutes that as move 17 was computed by DB. > >Mr Hyatt Nick de Firmian did not said explicitly that Deep Blue had a prepared analysis through line 24, the line was only prepared up to move 17 in round 2, what he meant that it emerged with a large opening advantage ( before it beagan to think" ) which after move 17 it was very easy for DB to come out ahead. The important issue here is that de Firmian prepared Deep Blue with most of the known Closed Openings assuming that Kasparov would eventually ended up playing one of them, which he did and in that case Deep Blue would not have any major problem coming out off the opening, since if he decided to play a normal open line against Deep Blue it would not have encounter any major problem since Computer excell in open games. Whereas Deep Junior was not programmed against all the known Closed Opening defenses such as how to handle the stone Wall or many others. Pichard. > > > > > Kasparov >>was a single opponent known to the team of Deep Blue specially where Nick de >>Firmian prepared a special opening lines in case Kasparov dicided to play the >>closed defense of the Ruy Lopez which he did. It is very different when you have >>to face 9 different opponents as deep Junior did at the Dortmund without >>preparing any special opening lines against any of the opponents, but the humans >>opponents some like Kramnik decided to play a very effective Anti-Computer >>strategy such as the stone Wall Defense. >> >>Pichard. >> >>>>PS: At the same time Amir made it harder for any future programmer to challenge >>>>any of the top 10, in Tournament Time Control, because in the future all the GM >>>>will not DARE to play an Open game against Deep Junior or Deep Fritz SSS as in >>>>the last game vs Leko. And unless programmers built more ABS Anti- Block- System >>>>to prevent GMs From blocking the center and attacking on whatever side the king >>>>castle, like on Kramnik game, the same situation will arise time after time >>>>again. >>>> >>>>Pichard.
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.