Author: Uri Blass
Date: 15:07:47 08/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 22, 2002 at 17:53:22, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 22, 2002 at 17:40:48, Matthew Hull wrote: > >>On August 22, 2002 at 17:13:35, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On August 22, 2002 at 16:39:38, Matthew Hull wrote: >>> >>>>On August 22, 2002 at 16:09:06, Chris Carson wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 22, 2002 at 15:32:32, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On August 22, 2002 at 15:15:08, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On August 22, 2002 at 14:37:07, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On August 22, 2002 at 14:20:41, William H Rogers wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>[snip] >>>>>>>>>... That they beat the worlds champ in 2 out of 3 is on >>>>>>>>>record, but that does not make them the worlds best. >>>>>>>>>Bill >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>It does if no other program has done it or can do it. I guess we'll soon know >>>>>>>>the answer if the Fritz/Kramnik thing ever happens. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Kramnik gets the machine before the match. >>>>>>>The interesting match is kasparov-Junior and not Kramnik-Fritz. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I think that you should learn statistics and 6 games are too little data to >>>>>>>decide and stopping to play after these 6 games suggest that they know that they >>>>>>>were lucky and they want to give the public the worng impression by not playing >>>>>>>more games. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I do not fall for this trap. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Uri >>>>>>>Uri >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Let's put it this way. They are the only one's to ever get that lucky. But for >>>>>>some people, beating the World Champ in 6 games with a lot of skill and some >>>>>>luck (maybe even a lot of luck) adds up to zero. I think it adds up to > zero. >>>>>>Can you at least admit that? >>>>> >>>>>Results for DB and Commercials: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ELO Opp >>>>>DB97 2862 2795 +2 =3 -1 >>>>> >>>>>Tiger 2788 2497 +8 =3 -0 >>>>>DJ6 2702 2792 +2 =5 -2 >>>>>Rebel 2697 2697 +2 =0 -2 >>>>>DF6 2678 2545 +6 =4 -2 >>>>> >>>>>DB96 2642 2775 +1 =2 -3 >>>>> >>>>>Based on results, the top commercial programs are equal to DB today. >>>>>The 2700 GM that Rebel tied with played 100 preparation games, GM Kasparov vs DB >>>>>had none. >>>> >>>>How many preparation games did Andersson get before playing Morphy? Does anyone >>>>dispute the fact that Morphy beat Andersson? Are there endless debates about >>>>who was _really_ the stronger player? >>> >>>He played no preperation games against a copy of the opponent >>>when the opponent does not know about it and this is the point. >>> >>>> >>>>Was Fischer really stronger than Spassky? He only just barely beat him. He >>>>probably would have lost if he hadn't made such a rediculous fuss and disrupted >>>>the match. And he was too chicken to play Karpov. But I don't see you or >>>>anybody else sticking up for Spassky or Karpov. >>> >>>Fisher played a lot of games. >>>He beated some players 6-0. >>> >>>Fisher was better than spassky also based on public games >>>against other players. >>> >>>It was not the case with deeper blue because it played no >>>public games against other players. >>> >>>>>The commercial programs can be played by anyone. DB was only played >>>>>by a select few team members and a few games later by DBjr. The commercial >>>>>programs are the best today and results as good as DB and over more games. DB >>>>>is a dead horse. >>>> >>>>According to the laws of arithmetic, 2862 is still greater than 2788. And it >>>>was achieved against _THE_ WORLD CHAMPION. None of the others can boast that. >>> >>>Humans could not get experience against something similiar to the thing >>>and the situation today is different. >>> >>>Uri >> >>From what I've read in these threads, especially the contributions from Dr. >>Hyatt and his knowlege and conversations with the team members, it seems that >>the DB2 team was caught off guard by their victory. They were expecting maybe >>at best a draw and at worst, some well fought losses. They were expecting to do >>one more improvement iteration. >> >>But when they won, IBM management stepped in and shut down the project and >>reaped the marketing rewards. >> >>Well, give them a break then. Yeah, the logs weren't available, the re-match >>didn't happen. Just a lot of stuff they hadn't planned for happened and didn't >>happen. >> >>From the outside, I guess their behavior looked strange, rude, unaccountable. >>But if you think about it (especially if you've ever worked in a >>mega-corporation), it makes perfect sense. >> >>Why people can't see this is beyond me. Why do we need to hear you guys >>discredit their work, belittle their playing strength, and pooh pooh their >>victory? What is there to be learned from such stuff? >> >>All the other DT/DB machines were the best. DB2 was surely that and much more. >> >>Why is that so hard to accept? >> >>You will say "I analyzed the games. They didn't impress me". Yet they were >>good enough to rattle and _defeat_ THE WORLD CHAMPION. >> >>Even THE WORLD CHAMPION HIMSELF was impressed with at least _one_ move. >> >>I'd bet GNUChess running on a 10ghz processor could beat today's commercials on >>their 2ghz machines. Surely, DB2 would have an even greater speed advantage. > >I'd bet that GNUchess on 10gh cannot beat the commercial >with 2Gh except maybe blitz and I doubt if it even can do it >in blitz. > >Gnuchess even lost against my movei in a match of peter berger >on equal hardware and movei is not close to the top programs. > >It is weaker than them in tactics and it has almost >no knowledge in it's evaluation. > >Uri I can add that there was a big improvement in chess programs in the last year so I can believe that gnuchess could beat the top programs of 1997 with time advantage of 5:1. I read that gnuchess beated the top programs when it had better hardware some years ago but software gets better and I guess that today it is going to need at least 1 hour per move against 3 minutes per move only to get 50%. Maybe Bob hyatt can try to play a winboard tournament of gnu against Crafty when Crafty is using hardware is 5 times slower(if it is impossible than telling crafty to do nothing in part of it's search can emulate this situation). Crafty is not the best program but I expect even Crafty to get more than 50% when the time control is slow enough. 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.