Author: Peter Berger
Date: 23:57:51 08/09/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 09, 2001 at 12:33:47, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On August 09, 2001 at 07:12:11, Tanya Deborah wrote: > >> >> >>Hi! >> >>Is really Deep Fritz running in 8 processors stronger that Deep Blue (97)??? >> >> >>I hear that Deep Fritz 7 will see 5 millions nodes per second. It is enough to >>beat the World Champion??? >> >>I think that if Deep Fritz could see 500 millions nodes per second, Kramnik will >>be dead. >> >>And why i find an article that said that Deep Fritz 7 recently beat Deep Blue, >>the same machine that beat Kasparov in 1997. It is true????? Where i can find >>the games?? >> >>Thanks a lot! > >Reporters seem to be like chess players, in a sense. If you give them a >position that is recognizeable, they will see patterns and understand stuff and >make a sensible move. > >If you set the board up randomly, they will look at it and not be able to handle >it, and won't make a good move. > >When a reporter covers computer chess, all of them see a scrambled board. And >since they are also under time pressure, their moves are all crap. > >No, DeepFritz did not recently beat Deep Blue. > >Fritz 4 (or maybe 3?) beat Deep Thought II in one game in 1995. Old versions of >both, both running on wimped out hardware by today's standards. > >It's intriguing bait for reporters, because the precursor machines really did >play. But they can't get from that idea to something factual. > >bruce > >>Tanya D. I don't think many reporters were really thinking of this Hongkong game. More likely they were confused by the qualifier against Deep Junior. With Deep Blue,Deep Blue Junior and Deep Junior it's easy to fail. And if they read that Fritz qualified in a computer match to challenge the worldmaster they probably assumed Deep Blue as a logical opponent. pete
This page took 0.01 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.