Author: Pete R.
Date: 09:44:58 06/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 22, 2000 at 21:58:32, Hans Gerber wrote: >The German ISP has several million members. BTW would it be better to say >chessical? Anyway I will try to disguise that I should be a crazy individual in >your conviction... (You have a tendency to use such words, idiot and crazy.) Had you not brought up the question of your identity, and further mentioned it here, I would have let it slide. But methinks thou doth protest too much on this point, and you aroused my curiosity. :) First, it is clear that you have limitless energy when it comes to debates on this topic, so that I should presume to "lose" the debate by forfeit due to lack of equal enthusiasm. But this point is entertaining to me. I have "tracked" numerous people over the years in online discussions, people who feel that there is sufficient safety in numbers such that if they belong to a large ISP, they believe they are anonymous. Nothing could be further from the truth. Usenet has thousands of discussion groups, and the number of posters from t-online.de who participate in some obscure interest group like r.g.c.c. is merely a handful. If the same individual posts in other groups, this is an easy fingerprint to identify one out of millions. Beyond that the specific writing style, idiosynchrosies (e.g. the non-word "chessic") and personal opinions add even more certainty. In short, it is not a difficult task. You are one of a handful of people from t-online.de with an interest in computerchess. The vague hints about the respective chess abilities of programmers vs. real players is a familiar theme, and when you mention the attitudes of "famous" programmers, particularly those that make comments about Kasparov, you are clearly referring to Dr. Hyatt. I have seen this mystery person from t-online.de deride Hyatt's "chessic" abilities in exactly this fashion. The mystery person was also hypersensitive to insults in any form, something you have clearly demonstrated here. Since this person was obsessed with Hyatt, it makes sense that he would be here in CCC to monitor him. So congratulations, by bringing up this point you have managed to personally convince me that you are the same person that posted as Rolf Tueschen on r.g.c.c. for years! :) If there is any moderation to be done here, the moderators should require solid proof of identity from anyone using t-online.de. As to the actual topic at hand, Kasparov was interviewed by Maurice Ashley after game 3 with the following exchange: "I don't want to put words in your mouth," Ashley said to Kasparov, "but you're saying that there may have been human intervention on the part of the Deep Team?" Kasparov paused and answered, "It reminds me of the famous goal Maradona scored against England in the '86 World Cup. He said it was the hand of God." Again he had no basis to say this except for his irregular personality, which seems to go hand in hand with chess genius (your hero Fischer is an excellent example). Here is another quote from Kasparov, which I think is good. This was sent to members of Club Kasparov after the match: "This was a very tough match, which demanded a lot of my energy. It was also a very interesting match, that captured the imagination of millions of people all over the world. Unfortunately, they also got to see some errors on my part... " [true, and the important thing overall is the publicity for chess, which is why I think a rematch is a good idea. IMO Kasparov's goal is and should be to use his fame to increase the popularity of the game - hence it is also counterproductive for him to appear to be a poor sportsman] "I admit that I was probably too optimistic at the start of the match. I followed the conventional wisdom when playing computers of playing 'ugly' openings [non-theoretical] to avoid early confrontation, to accumulate positional advantages and then I was confident that my calculation would stay at a high level once the confrontation occurred. My whole preparation was a failure because Deep Blue played very differently from what I expected. My preparation was based on some wrong assumptions about its strategy; and when after game 2 it proved to be a disaster, I over-worked myself. I actually spent more energy on the games in this match than for any before in my life. Every game in this match took a lot out of me. There was enormous pressure because I had to keep my eye on every possibility, since I didn't want to miss any single shot. " [the psychological pressure here is understandable, and not unexpected. It's part of playing a machine.] "This is also partly why I lost this match. When Game 6 finally came, I had lost my fighting spirit. I simply didn't have enough energy left to put up a fight. At the end of Game 5 I felt completely emptied, because I couldn't stand facing something I didn't understand. If I had been playing against a human whom I knew, then it would have been different. For example, I was one game down against Anand in the 1995 world championship, but I fought back. Here, I was fighting the unknown. " [true and understandable, but irrelevant. He was not playing a known quantity, but so what? It was not a condition he asked for until after the match. So of course he could have played better. He realized the machine was stronger than he expected, and he felt the lack of preparation against this specific opponent was a disadvantage. Well, it certainly was. So what? This wasn't a legitimate world championship match, it was an exhibition match that drew a lot of publicity.] "Despite the score of this match, I am firmly convinced that this thing is beatable. Having said that, I don't think there are that many players in the world who would be able to beat it. I think only four or five players in the world would stand a chance against Deep Blue You need outstanding chess qualities to play it - you simply can't make comparisons with other chess computers. " [here he completely contradicts himself and shows that his complaints in Game 2 were simply due to his temper. He admits you can't compare DB to other chess machines, and yet he has the nerve to cry "how can a computer not play Qb6?". He knew the answer to his own question, but his temper made him accuse IBM of dishonest play. Incidently Karpov said that Kasparov had no right to complain that the computer found a good positional move after he made the terrible move 34...f6. ] "Take my case: I have an enormous score in training against the best PC programs, but it didn't help me to prepare for Deep Blue. As a matter of fact, I think I made a mistake in doing that. In the future I have to prepare specifically for Deep Blue, and play normal chess, as well as normal openings. " [certainly this would be a good idea for a rematch.] "Is there a future? Yes, I think so! I just challenged IBM for a rematch, to take place later this year, under slightly different conditions, such as 10 games, with one rest day between each game. Further, I want to receive ten practice game played by Deep Blue against a Grandmaster, as well as the nomination of an independent panel to supervise the match and Deep Blue, making sure there are no suspicions whatsoever. If this match takes place, and I hope it will, I am so confident I can win it, that I am even willing to play for a "winner takes all" prize. My score prediction? 6-4 in my favor! - Kasparov" ------- No disagreement with any of this last part, except to point out that there would have been a brighter future if he had not lost his temper and acted like a poor sportsman. To this day, long after all logs have been publicly released by IBM, he still gives lectures where the first thing he brings up about the match is this Hand of God garbage. This simply shows a lack of character and judgment. He should have simply stuck with what he said in this speech, i.e. he was unprepared for the strength of the machine, had no chance for specific preparation against it, and got tired. All of this is forgivable for a human player. Therefore he requests in the rematch that he should be able to study games of the machine, play more games spread over a longer time period so that he can rest between games, and have objective oversight of the machine, though it's difficult to say this last part without treading on the poor taste of baseless accusations again. But complaining and accusing simply lowers the image of chess players, and the goal of such matches goes beyond Kasparov personally, it goes to his obligation to further the popularity of the game. So Rolf, that's about all I have to say about this. :)
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.