Author: stuart taylor
Date: 20:51:07 05/04/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 04, 2000 at 22:11:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >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... Well that certainly sounds like the bottom line to all you are saying! The ball should now be in Kasparovs court. Either he has some problem in accepting those printouts, or he really thinks he can bluff everyone. S.Taylor
This page took 0.07 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.