Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:38:55 05/02/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 02, 2001 at 22:41:20, Steve wrote: >Perhaps someone can explain to me why this match is so "important," because I >don't see it. When Kasparov played Deep Blue, the match attracted wide interest >because (1) Kasparov was already a legend, the winner of several epic world >championship matches, the world's top-rated player for umpteen years, the winner >of virtually every tournament he entered, and a flamboyant showman with real >charisma; (2) Deep Blue was unquestionably the world's most powerful >chess-playing machine; and (3) this match of unquestioned human and computer >champions raised the intriguing possibility that machine might for the first >time beat man at a game considered -- at least by most people in the West -- to >be the most intellectually challenging of all. None of that applies to the >forthcoming (or merely rumored?) match between Kramnik and Deep Fritz. It >offers (1) a player largely unknown to the general public, whose one great >achievement is his single match win against Kasparov; (2) a computer opponent >that is not only weaker than Deep Blue, but may well not even be the world's >strongest piece of chessplaying software; 1)There is not an agreement that a computer opponent is weaker than Deep Blue and some people say that it is better. 2)IBM's deep blue was invited to the tournament that Fritz and Junior played and did not go. If IBM gives no proof that Deeper blue is better than the top programs of today I see no reason to assume as obvious that it is better. A loss of Fritz against kramnik can prove nothing because kramnik has better conditions than the conditions that kasparov had when playing Deeper blue. Uri
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.