Author: José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba
Date: 03:44:47 06/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 06, 2001 at 16:56:34, Otello Gnaramori wrote: >Can somebody confirm the following "abstract" from Intl. Herald Tribune of >yesterday , thanks in advance : > > >David Burgess International Herald Tribune Tuesday, June 5, 2001 > >And It Doesn't Take Long for 'Deep Fritz' to Prove Its Chess Mastery > >HAMBURG Across from me sits the most intimidating chess player in the world, >perhaps the greatest chess master ever. This player's skill level is inhuman - >literally. My adversary is "Deep Fritz," and it is a computer. Not just any >computer, mind you, but one that has trounced "Deep Blue," the computer that >beat the then-reigning human world champion, Garry Kasparov, in 1997. > >The full article is at http://www.iht.com/articles/21874.html > >Disclaimer : Please note that is Copyright 2001 by Intl. Herald Tribune. I believe the article is authentic. And I can conclude that Mr. Burgess is a weak chess player, because he loses with a knight and a huge time odds against Fritz. The main probles with the cited paragraph is the time-line: Fritz won the WCCC in 1995 (which is a big achievement in my opinion) outscoring and defeating a Deep Blue prototype (which according to Bob Hyatt differs a lot from later versions, I have no reason to believe Bob is wrong here), then Deeper Blue defeats Kasparov 3½-2½ in 1997 (please note that Deep Blue lost a match 4-2 in similar conditions one year before), and finally Mr. Burgess article is pretty current (june 2001). Over such a long time it is very misleading to try to make any conclusions on playing strenght, especially by somebody who is several hundred rating points weaker than any of the involved parties. José.
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.