Author: Matthew Hull
Date: 13:40:41 10/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 17, 2002 at 15:35:33, Mike S. wrote: >On October 17, 2002 at 15:18:48, stuart taylor wrote: > >>Why? Because even if Kramnik wins the last game, It doesn't make it look like >>Deeper Blue was really any better than Deep Fritz. And also, it shows computers >>to be up at the top, and also gives Kasparov a big incentive to beat that >>result vs. Deep Junior. (...) > >Regarding mass media perspective, draws of both matches would be most useful >results for computer chess in general. Because it neither could be claimed >based on results that comps are stronger or that top human players are stronger. >Which would mean, both the protesters against these 2 opinions had 50% to >complain against, and the followers of both opinions would have 50% support >each. > >So - optimistically thought - it could result in only half the nonsense than >when one side would win. > >Regards, >M.Scheidl But the games won by Fritz were actually lost by Kramnik. I think knowlegable people want--as real evidence of parity/superiority--to see the computer take it to the opponent and really out-GM the GM, rather than win by human blunder. They want to see a program that can play all aspects of the game like or better than a human GM. That will be the day!
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.