Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:22:17 07/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 22, 2000 at 05:29:29, Ed Schröder wrote: >On July 21, 2000 at 22:58:36, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On July 21, 2000 at 21:14:46, Ralf Elvsén wrote: >> >>>Trying to forget the NPS-discussion a second, I think one should >>>also look at the chess played. I am just a clubplayer and my >>>opinion is essentially worthless. Nevertheless... >>> >>>The chess Junior displayed at Dortmund was IMHO the same thing that happens >>>on my own PC but one or two (or three?) plies deeper. When I look >>>at the DB - Kasparov match 97 I think I see something different, >>>another dimension (yeah, I can't defend this point). >>> >>>I think it is possible that DBs potential performance against humans >>>wouldn't be extremely much higher than DJs. But DB could still possibly >>>crush DJ. These two scenarios aren't incompatible. Isn't it the >>>old discussion that rating differences are exaggerated in >>>comp - comp games? >>> >>>It would be interesting to hear what strong chess players think >>>(especially Kasparov :) >>> >>>my zero cents >>> >>>Ralf >> >> >>One point Hsu made when he told me about the original 10 game match with the >>200K nps DB, was that it won ten games non-stop due to one thing: a lack of >>king safety understanding. He played 5 games vs Genius and 5 vs the rebel >>version that was current back then. And he was quite specific about the >>problems they had defending against an attack. The problem back then was that >>computers didn't attack very well (they still don't). And they were (and still >>are for the most part) horrible at detecting attacks until it was too late. >> >>I think in normal games, 10 0 would be nearly impossible to do. But if your >>opponent cheerfully allows you to attack game after game, and sits there >>happily while you do, then 10 0 is quite easy to understand. >> >>I would shudder at the thought of a player like cptnbluebear, or insight, or >>several other very strong humans on ICC, if they attack like they attack, >>but if they had the tactical acuity of a computer to prevent the occasional >>blunder that loses won games. Hsu said he was surprised at first, but once >>he saw what was going on, it was obvious the micros were simply missing some >>important evaluation that he was doing after working with Joel and others. >> >>Just some more data to consider... > >Have you ever heard me (or Lang) complaining in the sense Hsu did concerning >last years 6 Paderborn games giving all kind of explanations for the losses? >Did I question the status of the Hsu games moaning concerning the conditions, >hash table size, strongest settings etc. etc...? > >No. > >Moaning if you lose usually won't do you any good neither does it change >the result. > >All I asked for are the games. Still don't have them. I would say that is the >least you can do when you shout 10-0 into public. > >Ed I would simply think that Hsu was trying to set the record straight after a few statements were made in public. Since DB wasn't going to play again, and since someone was claiming to have beaten DB Jr, which is still impossibly strong (re-read the quote from Hsu I posted), he wanted to set the record straight. I don't blame him...
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.