Author: KarinsDad
Date: 11:21:57 03/03/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 03, 1999 at 13:38:25, Charles Unruh wrote: [snip] > > > 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! That's exactly how I felt with the Karpov Anand championship. It's tied after 6 games, so we will go to faster times where Karpov wins 2 to keep his title. Anand had played 6 rounds to even get there in the first place and then he must win with speed chess. Bogus. Yeah, like Karpov should be the FIDE champion. Deep Blue beating Kasparov didn't prove anything other than a computer could beat a world champion at match play. It didn't prove the Deep Blue was better, just better in that particular 6 game match. KarinsDad
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.