Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:21:16 01/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 12, 2000 at 15:25:18, Rajendran Ramachandran wrote: >On January 12, 2000 at 14:45:13, Rajen Gupta wrote: > >>from the atrocious results of rebel vs grandmasters it is pretty clear that once >>humans get the feel of playing against computers or even a particular computer, >>they (ie humans)would get the better of computers.It is a fact that kasparov had >>no opportunity at all to evaluate deep blue while the reverse was not true.In >>all fairness kasparov should have been allowed a couple of weeks with deep >>blue-he would have identified the holes and blasted through them-just as the >>humans are now doing to rebel >> >>rajen gupta > >Well said rajen > >A complete list of games as a database of kasparov's games would have been >available to the computer for determining the style, weakness etc.. > >raj This is wrong. Did not Kasparov play completely different openings in the match than he played in prior tournaments? Did he not try some anti-computer stuff by taking DB out of book quickly with bizarre moves? So he can totally change his style of play so that old games are useless, while DB has to (a) provide old games and then (b) play exactly like it did in those old games? He got some atrocious advice for how to prepare for Deep Blue. He used the wrong training approach, using a micro and thinking it was teaching him how DB would play. He played openings he was unfamiliar with which put him into new territory against an opponent _very good_ in unfamiliar territory. It was error on top of error. Probably most of the errors were not his, but the result of listening to others.
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.