Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 12:29:51 07/21/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 21, 2000 at 11:03:13, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 21, 2000 at 07:42:00, Chris Carson wrote: > >>On July 21, 2000 at 07:06:08, Alvaro Polo wrote: >> >>>On July 21, 2000 at 01:11:57, Ed Schröder wrote: >>> >>>>On July 20, 2000 at 19:57:16, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 20, 2000 at 19:11:03, Ed Schröder wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>[Event "DB-GK the rematch"] >>>>>>[Site "am Rd1; bm Rf5+"] >>>>>>[Date "2000.05.31"] >>>>>>[Round "?"] >>>>>>[White "DEEP BLUE"] >>>>>>[Black "Garry Kasparov"] >>>>>>[Result "0-1"] >>>>>>[WhiteElo "?"] >>>>>>[BlackElo "?"] >>>>>>[FEN "4r3/8/2p2PPk/1p1r4/pP2p1R1/P1B5/2P2K2/8 b - - 0 1"] >>>>>> >>>>>>DB played Rd1?? which caused a giant immediate material loss where Rf5+ >>>>>>is the obvious defence. The most convincing argument is the score DB gave >>>>>>for Rd1?? way too positive (perhaps Uri remembers) and the very negative >>>>>>(and correct) scores some of the micro's gave when they did an analysis. >>>>> >>>>>Didn't someone say this one was caused by a C macro being improperly expanded or >>>>>some such? >>>> >>>>I don't know and I really don't care. All we have are a few games and >>>>hiding behind bugs is not a very convincing argument. >>>> >>>>Ed >>> >>>If what you are seeking is the truth you should care. >>> >>>Alvaro >> >>The truth is that Ed, Uri, and Amir are right. DB had bugs >>and a simple eval (so that HSU could put it into ASICS, HSU >>was a HW guy Murry was the SW guy, trade offs were made to >>create ASICS). >> >>Best Regards, >>Chris Carson > > >You are obviously an ASIC expert? And their claim of 8,000 adjustable eval >terms is therefore bogus? And it was our imagination that it beat Kasparov >3 years ago? > >thought so... > >Nice to have someone that doesn't know anything about hardware declaring what >Hsu could and couldn't do, _after_ he had already done it... I do know about ASICs. IIRC, Chris is also a EE. Just saying the magic word "ASIC" doesn't mean every term you can possibly dream of is trivial to implement and runs infinitely fast. I believe Amir has already given you examples of terms that would be extremely hard to evaluate given DB's architecture. If you refuse to believe two EEs and someone who has obviously carefully studied DB (more carefully than you, anyway) then go ahead. But don't expect respect from any of us. -Tom
This page took 0.01 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.