Author: allan johnson
Date: 00:59:36 03/04/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 04, 1999 at 03:08:47, odell hall wrote: >Hi CCC > > I continue to hear people try and make the victory of deepblue over >Garry Kasp, amount to nothing???? Firstly regardless of the Amount of games >played, When was the last time that anyone beat Garry Kaspy in a match period??? > We all know the answer to this question, It is totally, ludicrous to suggest >that this match meant nothing! I continue to hear pathetic excuses , such as >garry kasparov was not in form! Yet I remember many said the same bull about >him before he defeated Annand. What people are ignoring is that garry kasparov >is such a great player that he can defeat the best even in bad form!!! >I believe these attempts to minimize the victory of deepblue is a pure emotional >reaction, and has little to do which logic or reality. The fact is, deepblue >defeated kaspy in front of the entire world. This is why the amount of games >played is really irrelevant. Kaspy knew that his reputation was on the line. So >it doesn't matter if it was one game or one hundred! If he was the better >player he would have been victorious. What makes a world champion , the best in >any sport is his ability to rise to the challenge when something important is on >the line, historically kaspy has been able to come though under pressure. In my >view, this fact is what makes deepblue's victory more credible If everyone >thinks, and recollects about the pre-match news conferences, kaspy was quite >arrogant, he was sure that he would win the match. Only Grandmaster Joel >benjamin knew that the deepblue kaspy would face was much, much stronger than >kaspy realized. Apparently kaspy did not realize the leap and technical progress >made by the programmers of deepblue. And when he sat down to play it , I think >he was trumatized, realizing just how strong it was. Odell You seem to be forgetting in your views on the match between Kasparov and Deep Blue that Gary was not allowed to prepare against Deep Blue whereas the programmers of Deep Blue could readily plan against Kasparov. Some people may argue this is no great factor but Kasparov himself complained about it.Anyway a one game victory proves nothing.There is no doubt that computers are tactically getting stronger but I still believe the top human players have the edge.Yet as you say does it really matter?The pleasure I get from computers is that you have a grandmaster on call 24 hours a day and it's not going to bag you when it mates you quickly. Allan
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.