Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:26:20 09/10/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 10, 2001 at 04:19:49, Uri Blass wrote: >On September 10, 2001 at 01:47:23, Saran Maitreiwech wrote: > >>>that will be used for the match. I doubt he will tell the DF guys what >>>openings _he_ intends on playing, and what strategy _he_ is going to follow. >> >>What I think is this. If the rule says Kramnik can take a break, how can we know >>that he doesn't take a break with his copy of DF? >> >>When I read the answer from ChessBase to KasparovChess, I thought I may be >>something stupid to think that giving away a copy is ridiculous. But when you >>convince me that it is ridiculous, then I think I'm not stupid much. Thank you. > >The rules say simply that Kramnik wins because the organizers think that if >there is even 0.1% chance that kramnik does not win the match it is not >interesting. This _could_ be a key. Perhaps they see this as a long and fruitful process, rather than trying to end it all on the first or second match as with Kasparov and Deep Blue? IE a Kramnik win will likely guarantee a rematch, more publicity, etc. The marketing types are probably controlling this to an extent. > >This is the only reason that I can find for all these strange rules that say >even that Deep Fritz's book cannot be changed between games by more than 10 >plies. That rule is utterly ridiculous, and could _never_ be used in a human vs human chess match. > >It is totally unimportant if kramnik can use Deep Fritz after 60 moves because I >predict that kramnik is going to win most of the games in less than 60 moves > >We can probably learn nothing from the match unless chessbase decided to use >some trick (for example to let Deep Fritz to play in a different way only in the >dates of the match). > >Uri
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.