Author: Charles Unruh
Date: 10:38:25 03/03/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 03, 1999 at 12:47:43, Peter Fendrich wrote: >On March 03, 1999 at 11:07:24, Charles Unruh wrote: > >>On March 03, 1999 at 09:59:51, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On March 03, 1999 at 04:36:43, Lin Harper wrote: >>> >>>>Kaspy should never have agreed to such a short match. He would surely have >>>>caught up and passed the computer if he had time. >>> >>>I think Kasparov might be one of the best two or three players of all time. >>>But in _that_ match with deep blue, I personally believe that if the match >>>had gone two more games, it would have been two more won games for DB. Kasparov >>>"lost it" somewhere in the first 3-4 games and never recovered. And I don't >>>believe he would have recovered unless there had been a month break in the >>>match which would not have happened. >>> >>>The last two games of the match had him looking 'beaten' before he ever made >>>the first move. I think it would be very difficult for him to 'come back' >>>with additional games, given the way he appeared to feel... >> >> >>This really surprises me from you but anyway, It's quite a difficult thing to >>say that kasparov would lose some games because of emotion after he went down, >>because he would have been in a different frame of mind if he thought he had >>more than a mere 6 games. Further when a player has the "stuff" that it takes >>to be a world champion they have what is commonly known as the "Rocky Balboa >>Music!", after that 6th round loss when kasp would have walked in everone in the >>room would have been hearing that "duh duhnn, duh duh duhnn Adrian!!" >>> > >The guy lost, that's evidence enough for me. >If he is the better chess player or if he would win the next match is a >completely different story that we will never know, I'm afraid... >//Peter Evidence enough of what? If a world championship match was anounced of only 6 games NO ONE would think it was sufficient to prove anything, that's why there has never in the history of all chess been a championship match that was so short. Again as i said by your reasoning one could claim that after 9 rounds of the kasp vs Anand match since anand was in the lead by a point that indeed that should have proved to you that Anand was the better player. So all you are demonstrating is an illogical bias, because not only was the match just a mere 6 games, you have no other games of deep blues to point to to show it's strength so you are basing an opinion of strength based solely upon 6 games total! You can't even finsih a PROVISIONAL rating with 6 games!
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.