Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:27:45 05/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 08, 2000 at 00:11:50, blass uri wrote: >On May 07, 2000 at 22:00:04, Robert Hyatt wrote: > ><snipped> >>>From a scientific point of view the match was invalid, I agee. But from >>>the point of view of a normal chess match he lost. >>> >>>Ed >> >> >>I totally disagree. Kasparov asked for something he had no business asking >>for, something he would never have asked from a human opponent. > >The difference is that no human see a game against kasparov as a scientific >experiment. > It is a classic experiment. The question: "can a computer beat the world champion in a match, at tournament time controls?" To answer it, you pit a computer against the world champion in a tournament time control match. The 'noise' about "he should have had more games to study" or "he should have been given the printouts" or "he should have had this or that" are all reasonable points, but they had _nothing_ to do with the question being asked. And the 'experiment' was set up to answer that question, and that question only. I don't see how it can be thought of as "invalid"... ><snipped> >>If he was >>playing you, and suddenly said "drop your pants, I want to see what you have >>in there." Would you do so? > >Ed has a commercial program and is not supposed to look at the case from a >scientific point of view. > >Uri
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.