Author: Uri Blass
Date: 14:08:38 05/11/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 11, 2004 at 11:38:59, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On May 10, 2004 at 17:35:59, Vasik Rajlich wrote: > >>There was a discussion about the game Kasparov-Deep Blue, final match, game 1, >>whether the position after 11. .. g5 was playable. >> >>[D] r4rk1/ppbn1p2/2p1pn1p/q2p2pb/7N/PP1PP1PP/1BPN1PB1/R3QRK1 w - - 0 12 >> >>The following is how Junior-Shredder handled it. Black was the one trying to win >>in the endgame ... > >Why do you take shredder with black? > > >Take shredder with white for example against some passive playing engine >(knowing deep blue played ultra passive). The question is not if deeper blue could lose after g5. deeper blue could lose (kasparov beated it so we know that it could lose after g5). The question is if black is losing after g5(assuming that black does not blunder later). For investigating this question you need to take the best program as black and only if it still lose you have evidence that black is losing after g5. > >Take gnuchess for example and put it at 10-12 ply. > >Gnuchess also makes a lot of the mistakes deep blue made. Gnuchess knows about >g2,g3 doubled pawn though, deep blue didn't. > >deep blue's eval very similar to gnuchess simply, let's face it. Your words are very similiar to a lie Let's face it. 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.