Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:47:47 04/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 20, 2000 at 00:18:12, blass uri wrote: >On April 19, 2000 at 23:25:34, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 19, 2000 at 09:48:32, blass uri wrote: >> >>>On April 19, 2000 at 09:23:30, Mogens Larsen wrote: >>> >>>>On April 19, 2000 at 08:57:58, blass uri wrote: >>>> >>>>>Because it is not the commercial version. >>>> >>>>It should be the commercial version, because that would be fair (sic.). >>> >>> >>>I do not see something unfair in using not the commercial version unless >>>chessbase hides it. >>> >> >>Isn't this what IBM did with deep blue? Play vs Kasparov with a machine that >>no one had any games from? Wasn't this the most common whine about that event, >>that Kasparov was playing an unknown machine. >> >>But it is ok if Fritz does this? >> >>Guess I don't get it as they sound _identical_. > >You are right that people have no games of the new Fritz but I think that it is >similiar to Fritz6a except the fact that it is about 3 times faster and some >small software changes. > >People have some games of parallel Fritz (for example from WCCC) when kasparov >had no games of something similiar to Deep Blue and could not buy something >similiar that is only 3 times slower. > >Uri There were plenty of games available from deep blue junior. And there were games from 1 year previous when he first played DB. I only think it interesting that it is wrong when IBM does it, but not when a commercial chess enterprise does exactly the same thing. Not that I think either is wrong...
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.