Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 09:11:59 04/17/05
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 2005 at 10:33:57, chandler yergin wrote: >They knew that Kasparov used the Commercial >Programs during his analysis.. and thought Deep Blue used the Commercial >Opening Books. He was Naive.. didn't realize how he was being 'sandbagged'! >So there was human intervention. I call that cheating! I could never read from American sources that the tricks you referred to and which are almost "normal" in human chess in special concerning the openings are sort of gambling if that is added to a machine against a human player in a show of only 6 games, three pro color. Not because this is unsportive but because it doesn't prove what it should, namely the chess superiority of the machine. Kasparov thus didn't lose to DB II but to the tricks of the human team behind DB II and their psycho tricks you didn't mention. The goal of the "experiment" was the decision who's stronger MAN or MACHINE. The question is still wide open.
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.