Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:11:11 05/04/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 04, 2000 at 18:26:04, stuart taylor wrote: >On May 03, 2000 at 21:52:02, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 03, 2000 at 20:53:43, stuart taylor wrote: >> >>>On May 03, 2000 at 18:15:01, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On May 03, 2000 at 16:48:09, Pete R. wrote: >>>> >>>>>For those who made an issue out of the date of Kasparov's comments in the thread >>>>>below, I present you an article from a speech only a few weeks old: >>>>> >>>>>http://www.clubkasparov.com/serve/templates/folders/show.asp?p_docID=4954&p_docLang=EN >>>>> >>>>>Same old tune. Again there is the tantalizing hint that he is looking to repeat >>>>>a match of this type. Clearly he can't have reconsidered negotiations with Hsu, >>>>>can he? Hsu sounded like he definitely moved on. I would love to hear him >>>>>clarify what steps he is taking to bring a match of this type about. Sounds >>>>>like O.J.'s quest for the "real killers". ;) >>>> >>>>But that's only your own (albeit-educated) judgement about the greatness of >>>Deeper Blue and of its win being deservable. But why DID deeper blue team >>>refuse what Kasparov demanded? And wasn't his demand just? And doesn't any >>>human deserve his optimum psychological conditions if his results are to be >>>just? >>> Stuart Taylor >> >>Do you _really_ think that had Kasparov won, that he would have sat down with >>the DB team and laid out what he was thinking, etc? Do you think that after >>any big-ticket match like that, that the winner sits down with the loser and >>gives him details about what he was thinking, planning, how he thought his >>positions were at various points in the game, etc? >> >>Doesn't happen. >> >>As far as conditions, Kasparov dictated _every_ aspect of the match. Including >>some that were completely ridiculous. He was in no 'psychological distress' >>that was caused by the DB/IBM people. Any things he didn't like about the >>conditions can safely be blamed on the person he sees in the mirror each >>morning. Since IBM gave him everything he asked for in pre-game contractual >>agreements... >> >>He dictated the terms, he signed the contract. Then after losing, he complained >>about the conditions that he, himself, demanded. >> >>totally sane? >> >> >> >> >>>>To paraphrase Mimi in the Drew Carey show, >>>> >>>>"he has spewed so much bullshit, he had to start a second pile." >>>> >>>>:) > >If Kasparov had won, he still would have had the same views, but would not >have needed to speak about them so much. He prefers to be able to win even >at a disadvantage to himself-as if to show contempt-and to be more entertaining. >But not at the expense of loosing the whole match. > It also makes sense that he only realized certain things later, but why >shouldn't he speak it out. He does admit that the mistakes were his. > He clearly learned a good lesson in life, that one must think about the other >persons ego, and he should have asked himself more clearly-"What DO >deep blue want out of all this? > So he should be more sportmanlike? perhaps that's the main criticism? >But since IBM just ran away like that, I think it serves the sport very well >to behave in the way that he does. > And is the real reason why the deep blue team didn't show the printouts >only because it wasn't stipulated before hand? I'm not so sure! >S.Taylor You are aware that _all_ of the printouts for the 6 games are on IBM's web site? And they have been there for months...
This page took 0.06 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.