Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 16:10:49 05/07/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 07, 2004 at 11:16:30, Dan Ellwein wrote: >On May 07, 2004 at 04:19:21, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On May 07, 2004 at 01:03:20, Jouni Uski wrote: >> >>>Has You looked for that afterword? There is very short comment to Kasparov >>>vs. Junior and Kramnik vs. Fritz. Hsu still claims DB was superior to >>>Fritz/Junior in tactics! Really? >>> >>>Jouni >> >>Let me quote Bruce Moreland: "i would love to have a shot at deep blue in blitz, >>i tactically will destroy it". >> >>This was with Ferret at a 4x 400Mhz PII machine. >> >>I agree with Bruce. >> >>We must be realistic. Deep Blue needed 3 minutes to get to 10 ply in openings >>positions. In endgames it finished 12 ply a lot. Most middlegame positions >>however it searched 10 - 11 ply. > >Vincent >if that was the case... >how was Deep Blue able to win a match from Garry K. Because Garry had a different agenda. a few minutes after the match kasparov was live at CNN and praised the machine. A few hours later when he learned he would not get automatically a rematch (in the world championship cycles in those years there was a rule that automatically gives the worldchampion chess a rematch when he loses his title), he was furious and said a lot of bad words which we all know. But let me show you history. One of the most important chess matches ever, years of preparation for both players. Kasparov playing against Karpov for world title. Kasparov brings the NOVELTY 5.Ng5! there which nowadays is the mainline. Years of preparation into it for Kasparov in order to beat Karpov. See below. You sure that when playing black against Deep Blue that Kasparov didn't know that 7..h6?? is losing for black? [Event "Optiebeurs"] [Site "Amsterdam"] [Date "1988.05.??"] [Round "4"] [White "Kasparov,Garry"] [Black "Karpov,Anatoly"] [Result "1-0"] [Eco "B17"] 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 dxe4 4.Nxe4 Nd7 5.Ng5!!N (novelty) Ngf6 6.Bd3 e6 7.N1f3 Bd6! (7..h6?? +-) 8.0-0 h6 9.Ne4 Nxe4 10.Bxe4 0-0 11.c3 e5 12.Bc2 Re8 13.Re1 exd4 14.Rxe8+ Qxe8 15.Qxd4 Qe7 16.Bf4 Bxf4 17.Qxf4 Nf8 18.Re1 Be6 19.Nd4 Rd8 20.h4 Qc5 21.Re3 Qd6 22.Nxe6 fxe6 23.Qg4 Qd2 24.Bb3 Kh8 25.Re2 Qd6 26.g3 a6 27.Kg2 Re8 28.Re3 Re7 29.Rf3 Rd7 30.Qh5 Qe7 31.Qe5 Rd8 32.a4 b5 33.Qe4 Qc7 34.Rf4 c5 35.Qf3 Qd6 36.axb5 axb5 37.Rf7 Rb8 38.Ra7 b4 39.Bc2 bxc3 40.bxc3 Qe5 41.Rf7 Nh7 42.Qg4 Kg8 43.Re7 Nf8 44.Qf3 c4 45.Be4 Kh8 46.Bc6 Nh7 47.Qf7 Nf8 48.Re8 Rxe8 49.Bxe8 Nh7 50.Bd7 Nf6 51.Bxe6 h5 52.Bxc4 Qe4+ 53.Kh2 Kh7 54.Qe6 Qf3 55.Qe1 Ng4+ 56.Kg1 Qc6 57.Bd3+ g6 58.Qe7+ Kh6 59.Be4 Qb6 60.Qf8+ Kh7 61.Qf7+ Kh6 62.c4 1-0 No one gave a penny for deep blue's chances in 1997. You can every day bet on chess games. See for example www.betsson.com, this is just one of the many sites to bet on it. Russians bet on everything. You could earn millions betting on deep blue that last game in 1997. I'm not saying kasparov did do just that. What i do say is that he deliberately played a lost line with black. Why he did that i do not know. You draw your own conclusions. What i do know 100% sure is that kasparov knew he was playing a losing line. For sure is also that about every 1900 rated caro-kann player and above knows that h6?? is losing and that moves like Qe7 only make it worse. Because they have read it in a book. Who wrote that book you guess? >my best >Dan >> >>On average they claimed a search depth of 12.2 ply but this is not iterative >>depth but 'observed' depth. So the singular extension depth added to it (not >>qsearch i guess). >> >>10 ply with a singular extensions and threat extensions and mate extensions is >>in theory tactical very strong. Certainly for 1997 standards. >> >>However in hardware they cannot do any dangerous extension. Not only Hsu >>explicitly mentions it, also Chrilly has done very clear statements that >>hardware search is *that* inefficient that he had to forward prune in hardware >>in a very primitive way. Same for Deep Blue. In its 4 ply of hardware search it >>forward pruned, and *had* to of course. Both cannot use any dangerous extensions >>in hardware search. Deep Blue triggers the last one at 4 ply depth left. >> >>This where software products pick up incredible tactics last few plies. They see >>just near to shit last few plies. >> >>So you can extend a lot in mainsearch, but 10 ply - 4 = 6 ply. So within 6 ply, >>it should see everything then. >> >>Let's be clear, this in 2004 is not a realistic scenario. Hsu still lives in the >>80s. He did live there in 1997 still. His machine didn't even use nullmove which >>by 1995 had been clearly proven for every idiot on the planet as the way to go. >> >>Frans Morsch *publicly* did statements about recursive nullmove. During dinner >>every programmer has heard it, i'm sure of it. >> >>What Hsu writes is utter nonsense.
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.