Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 09:03:55 04/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 24, 2001 at 10:03:17, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 24, 2001 at 05:04:05, David Blackman wrote: > >>On April 24, 2001 at 03:47:15, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>the best software that is not IBM. >>> >>>Suppose there is a match of 20 games at tournament time control >>> >>>I am interested to know how many people expect 20-0 for IBM >>>How many people expect 19.5-.5?.... >>> >>>If IBM expect to do better result then the average result that the public expect >>>then they can earn something from playing a match of 20 games with Deep Blue. >>> >>>I believe that a part of the public who read the claim that kasparov played like >>>an IM are not going to expect good result for IBM. >>> >>>Uri >> >>The general public wouldn't have a clue. >> >>The semi-computer-chess-literate public doesn't have much of a clue. Very >>few have the chess skill to look at games by Deep Blue and other computers >>and see which is best, even if they use computers to help them analyse. And >>the last head-to-head public games between Deep Blue and micro-computers were >>a long time ago, against programs and hardware that were weaker than current >>versions. >> >>I think asking people who know a little bit about computer chess, you will get >>answers all the way from 0-20 up to 20-0, mostly selected at random. >> >>Now for my very own random guess at a score: >> >>If Deeper Blue was run in the trim that played Kasparov in the last match, i >>expect a result around 14-6, because that version was heavily tuned for playing >>against Kasparov, and would play moves that will get you into trouble against >>Fritz and friends. >> >>With a bit of retuning for playing against computers, i think the result would >>improve to 17-3 or better against anything except Shredder, or even against the >>Shredder you buy off the shelf. 19.5 - 0.5 is even possible, but not a >>certainty. There are just too many things can lose you a half point, or even a >>whole point, in a match that long. >> >>Against a Shredder tuned up specially for the match, and operated by its author, >>all bets are off. Shredder would be totally outgunned in every way, but when it >>comes to big events, it really has some kind of "sense of occasion". I don't >>know what it does that is special, but its history of winning big events is just >>awesome. So a result would be hard to pick. > > >Nice to see some sound reasoning now and then. 2-18 and 8-12 are just >incredible statements for anyone to make. Just like predicting Kasparov >would lose 18-2 to somebody... In a match draws do not count for the person who is up in score as it only gets him nearer to his goal. kasparov was actually beaten with a similar score by kramnik if you extrapolate the score not counting the draws! Of course in any human match you expect loads of draws as that's enough with black. Best regards, Vincent
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.