Author: Louis Fagliano
Date: 14:55:20 10/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 17, 2002 at 16:18:40, Jonas Cohonas 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. >> If the end result were 3-5 to Kramnik, it wouldn't look so close. Now it's it's >>almost a question of luck what happens in the one last game. >> The last game of Kasp.vs DB, the luck was on the DB side, because kasparov had >>just gone to the end of his nerves. >> >>Don't forget Kramnik had the program, long before, and Kramnik is probably a bit >>stronger than Kasparov VS computers. So DB already doesn't look like it was >>stronger. >>S.Taylor > >So far DF7 has not won a game, Kramnik has lost both. I have yet to see a game >where DF7 controled the game, i am not impressed. > >Regards >Jonas Well, just plain outplaying a super GM is not one of a computer's strengths. DF got it's wins by alertly pouncing on Kramnik's tactical errors instead of outplaying him and that's because that's where it's strength lies. But alertly pouncing on your opponent's tactical errors is still part of the game of chess and is certainly a legitimate way to win. Thus, the last hurdle for computers to jump would be to win by outplaying a super GM. They are not able to do that yet. But few people think that that day will never come.
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.