Author: Pete R.
Date: 09:54:27 06/08/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 07, 2000 at 06:13:36, Dann Corbit wrote: >On June 07, 2000 at 05:58:23, blass uri wrote: >[snip] >>This is the reason that in many cases humans do not use chess programs to help >>them in analysis. >> >>I trust more a team of human and program than only one of them. > >Yet Kasparov pounded the stuffings out of an awesome team and computers spending >all night chugging away. > >A testimony to Kasparov's greatness as a chess player? He didn't pound the stuffings out of anything. It was a great game, he was sweating bullets, and we could have drawn the game if not for the voting system where any doofus can vote as many times as he likes, whether or not he even reads the team analysis. But Kasparov did have computer help in the form of Deep Junior. While the World team had theoretically more computing power, it's not meaningful to just add up the hardware. He is the world's greatest chess player, using a computer more powerful than any other single computer being used in the game, and that's a ferocious combination that a team of amateurs with computers simply couldn't deal with. The best analysis on the world team side came mostly from the strength of humans, Irina Krush and her team, a couple of IMs, one guy from Finland I think with a name I can't recall exactly (Anatti Pilajasano or something along those lines) and an American computer science prof IM Ken Regan, plus the Russian Grandmaster School team with occasional input from Alexander Khalifman. There was a strong effort by Peter Karrer I think to create partial tablebases which would have been awesome had they been available in time to steer the game. Then again we would have screwed by the voting system anyway, where any yahoo can vote any number of times for any move. In any case Kasparov didn't pound the stuffings out of anything, in fact if you go to the exhaustive analysis at http://www.smartchess.com/smartchessonline/smartchessonline/archive/MSNKasparov/index.htm you can see Kasparov's play was suboptimal. It was certainly one of the greatest games ever played, and although it was tainted by the voting system, Kasparov was deservedly proud of his effort.
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.