Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:37:36 04/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 09, 2000 at 10:41:50, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >On April 08, 2000 at 13:02:56, Daniel Chancey wrote: > >>How about we compare the Deep Blue games with the Fritz 6 games. also compare >>Kasparov's games. Who's better? >> >>Castle2000 > >all mony on fritz6 and not on deep blue. deep blue will get outsearched, >outbooked, and deep blue will miss all egtb in hardware. > >Also deep blue is way too aggressive tuned. You are kidding, correct? Or did you somehow lose 1 week on your calendar and think this is April 1? Otherwise this is nonsense. Put all your money on Fritz, if this event ever happens. You will make someone very happy... Fritz searches nowhere near as deep as deep blue. We've already been over the logs to see just how deep they really searched, and it was far deeper than you were thinking, not understanding their hardware. Typical depth was 15-17 plies according to their output. I'm not seeing _anybody_ search to depth 15-17 in the middlegame... > >Kasparov should be shot for his performance against deep blue. >sure he made it exciting, but the underestimation kasparov had in >the last few games, showing clearly that whatever he would do >he would win the match anyway, that underestimation luckily >is punished in game 6. > >Just the thought of giving the computer a position with a clear target >in the middle of the centre, only the thought should be already >deadly punished in a game. that happened. regrettably IBM won >billions of dollars on the stock market, and therefore didn't want >to risk all that, so a true comparision we will never see. > >Even so many years later, IBM doesn't want to play, yes even sold >the rights of the chip to someone not carrying IBMs name. > >IBM will be therefore forever winner. Who knows a program called 'hsu' ? > >My program's name DIEP looks more like 'deep blue' than 'hsu' chess >will ever look like. With a blue interface in Aegon 97, over 50% of everyone >passing by and watching my games even mistook DIEP for Deep Blue. > >Most even had the guts to ask. I was asked about a hundred times >that tournament. incredible... > >If i compare the positional mistakes made by deep blue with todays software, >then it's obvious that todays software is much stronger. How can an educated person make that statement? Please post your six game win against Kasparov. Please post _any_ six game match win vs Kasparov by _any_ computer... Your idea of "weak" might not match with DB's idea of "weak". And until DB's idea of weak is proven wrong, I tend to stick by it... > >Please go to icc see the program 'deepviolet' play, see the types >of positional mistakes it makes (capturing bishops at g3 >always because that leaves opponent doubled pawn for example), >and give me one reason why it wouldn't be deep blue on a PC. because it has been around 6-7 years. It is not deep blue. > >I have not seen deepviolet lose games because of clearly missing >tactical shots. All mistakes it makes can be explained as positional >mistakes. all positional mistakes it makes are the same type of >positional mistakes deep blue has made in the second match against >kasparov. > >So considering deep violet doesn't make tactical mistakes, >it's hard to imagine deep blue being higher rated as deepviolet. > >Vincent finger scratchy on ICC. Then talk about other ratings. look at the number of wins and losses by scratchy. Then pick _any_ program of your choice and look at the same ratio. hmmmm????
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.