Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: But Not Yet As Good As Deep Blue '97

Author: Amir Ban

Date: 14:44:49 07/17/00

Go up one level in this thread


On July 17, 2000 at 17:33:22, Peter Kappler wrote:

>On July 17, 2000 at 17:26:36, blass uri wrote:
>
>>On July 17, 2000 at 17:07:35, Peter Kappler wrote:
>>
>>>On July 17, 2000 at 17:02:22, Peter Kappler wrote:
>>>
>>>>On July 17, 2000 at 16:09:09, Amir Ban wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On July 17, 2000 at 07:22:41, Graham Laight wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm afraid I still feel that Junior could have come out ahead (instead of
>>>>>>level)in this tournament by beating Bareev and Khalifman - and possibly by not
>>>>>>losing with such apparent ease to Kramnik. Continuing the game against Anand
>>>>>>might possibly have gained an extra half point as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I think that Amir has an aspiration to make his program demonstably better than
>>>>>>Deep Blue (this certainly comes across in his interviews published on the
>>>>>>Chessbase Website coverage of Dortmund (www.chessbase.com) before the Kramnik
>>>>>>game). If so, as a (hopefully!) impartial member of the viewing public, I'm
>>>>>>afraid to say that I've yet to be convinced.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>As evidence, I point firstly to the games against Bareev and Khalifman. On both
>>>>>>occasions when Deep Blue '97 gained an advantage over Gary Kasparov (who's a
>>>>>>better player than anyone at Dortmund was), it parlayed that advantage into
>>>>>>victory - whilst Deep Junior twice failed conspicuously to "slam in the lamb".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I would also point to the game against Khalifman. Here we see Deep Junior lose
>>>>>>to a combination of blocked centre and king attack - classic anti computer
>>>>>>methods which have both been well known for a long time. They work because, in
>>>>>>this case, nothing short of truly massive search depth is going to help you to
>>>>>>make the correct moves.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>However, for both king attack and blocked centre, Deep Blue '97 demonstrated
>>>>>>that it's evaluation knowledge was able to adequately handle the challenge.
>>>>>>Indeed, in game 2 in '97, Deep Blue not only handled the blocked centre, it
>>>>>>turned it into a win!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It took Deep Blue 2 attempts to beat Gary Kasparov, the world's best player -
>>>>>>maybe another year of work will push Deep Junior to a position where it can try
>>>>>>to win these tournaments, instead of settling for a middling position.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>But let's not be completely churlish - Dortmund 2000 was indeed a fantastic
>>>>>>performance by Deep Junior - and a landmark in computer chess history, since
>>>>>>here is both a computer and a program which one can buy in the shops!
>>>>>
>>>>>I disagree with most of this, but it's your opinion, and if experience teaches
>>>>>us anything, it's useless to argue.
>>>>>
>>>>>For the record, I'm not trying to prove that I'm better than Deep Blue. I think
>>>>>I've already shown this some time ago, and I'm not the only one who can say so
>>>>>either.
>>>>>
>>>>>Looking at the (very few) games of DB, I don't see that it had either better
>>>>>evaluation or deeper search than today's top programs.
>>>>>
>>>>>Amir
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I must say I'm skeptical, though I would have a good laugh if it were true.
>>>>
>>>>Are you aware of any positions from the 2nd Kasparov-DB match where Junior (or
>>>>any other micro) plays a clearly better move than DB?
>>>
>>>I should clarify that it must play the move in 2-3 minutes, or whatever amount
>>>of time Deep Blue spent on the move.
>>>
>>>--Peter
>>
>>I disagree
>>
>>I think that Amir meant that assuming the same number of nodes per seconds he is
>>better than deeper blue.
>
>
>I'm pretty sure he's not assuming equal nps, but I'll wait for him to clarify.
>
>--Peter

You are right.

Amir




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.