Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

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

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 20:01:56 07/19/00

Go up one level in this thread


On July 18, 2000 at 23:53:50, Jason Williamson wrote:

>On July 18, 2000 at 16:26:08, Amir Ban wrote:
>
>>On July 18, 2000 at 11:05:03, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>I wouldn't begin to claim that DB "outplayed" kasparov in 97.  I do claim that
>>>it "beat" him, of course.  :)
>>>
>>>But in the above, the point is can you find any specific weakness in DB that
>>>would lead to GMs discovering that and beating it like a drum?  Can you find
>>>any weakness in Deep Junior that would lead to GMs discovering that and beating
>>>it like a drum?
>>>
>>>That is the main difference I see.  We _all_ saw the king safety/blocked
>>>position problem in Dortmund.  We didn't see any such problem in DB'97.  It
>>>must have weaknesses.  But obviously no glaring weaknesses.  DB'96 had them.
>>>Deep Junior (and every other program) of 2000 has them.  DB'97 was something
>>>'different' in that regard, even though many want to pound their chests and
>>>say "mine is clearly and obviously better" or "it was just a fast/dumb machine."
>>>Both are far from truth.
>>
>>I quote Garry Kasparov who told me that game 1 of the DB'97 match was "a typical
>>computer game". Deeper Blue showed gross misunderstanding of king safety and was
>>smashed.
>>
>>Amir
>
>But wasn't Kasparov also quoted as saying after game two he witnessed the birth
>of a new kind of intelegence?


:)

This is often called "selective memory".  Only remember the details that support
your argument, forgetting everything else.




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.