Author: Gordon Rattray
Date: 06:15:22 04/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 29, 2001 at 08:41:34, Dana Turnmire wrote: >On April 29, 2001 at 08:30:42, Gordon Rattray wrote: > >>On April 29, 2001 at 08:05:40, Dana Turnmire wrote: >> >>>On April 29, 2001 at 07:46:51, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>> >>>>What kind of champion Kramnik really is? Did Kasparov requested to pratice >>>>>against Kramnik three months before Kramnik himself challenge him?. NO!, >>>>>therefore, if he is going to represent the human kind he should do it with >>>>>honor. >>>>> >>>>>Pichard. >>> >>> Is It honorable for the chess program team to have access to Krammik's games >>>on database to prepare for the openings? You sound like a spokesman for >>>robotkind. I support mankind. >>> I thought Deep Blue had an incredible advantage over Kasparov. >> >>But Kramnik *will* have access to some games by the computer too! For example, >>supposing Deep Junior eventually plays Kramnik, I can download many games played >>by Deep Junior. There is a big difference between access to games and access to >>the player! >> >>I don't particularly support mankind or "robotkind", but I do support fair >>matches and this match is turning out to be a joke. Unfortunately if Kramnik >>wins it, people will summarise the result as "a human beat a computer in the >>last man-machine match". They won't append "...but the human practiced against >>the program for three months prior... and there may have been a stronger program >>that didn't get a chance to compete... etc etc." >> >>Why did you think Deep Blue had an incredible advantage over Kasparov? Was it >>because in *some* (not all) aspects it was a better chess player? >> >>Gordon > > The Deep Blue team had access to years of Kasparov's games with a GM preparing >the opening books. Kasparov was playing completely blind. He wasn't even >allowed to see any games by the program. Are you suggesting that anyone entering a match must be able to supply their opponent a minimum number of games? It is the *player's* responsibility to conduct their own preparation, and the opponent should have *no* responsibility for assisting that preparation. Deep Blue played games prior to the Kasparov match (e.g. against David Levy and also other computers) - if the Kasparov team couldn't find these then that is their problem (although I doubt this was the case!). Alternatively, if you are suggesting that these games are redundant since the machine was constantly changing (e.g. from Deep Thought to Deep Blue, etc), then Kasparov also changes the way he plays and if he doesn't change much, then once again that it up to him. A player has to make do with what games are available. If this amounts to a small collection, then they have to make do with that. Prior to many human world championships, the players participate in secret training matches against "sparring partners". This allows them to test new opening ideas, etc. Should these games be made available to their future opponent prior to the match? I very much doubt it. It is pathetic for any player to request information about their opponent other than what is already publicly available. Gordon
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.