Author: Mark Young
Date: 14:51:26 06/21/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 21, 2001 at 17:28:55, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On June 21, 2001 at 16:38:58, Mark Young wrote: > >>On June 21, 2001 at 09:41:01, Pierre Bourget wrote: >> >>>From an interview at Kasparovchess site: >>> >>>One more serious contest is in store for you, the match with a computer. How are >>>you preparing for this match? It?s common knowledge that, in preparing for duels >>>with humans, you don?t rely on a computer?s help much. >>> >>>It?s true that I prefer to work in the good old fashion. Well, certainly I will >>>play training games at home. According to the contract, I will obtain the >>>printouts of the DeepFritz games in late summer. >>> >>>I take this match very seriously and I really believe that the computer will be >>>a hard nut to crack. The rumors that DeepFritz is a far cry from DeepBlue are >>>not true to life. I don?t think that DeepFritz is much weaker than DeepBlue. >>>However, I know that the programmers have made vast headway in the past three >>>years. Fritz?s play is getting stronger every year. At some moments the machine >>>really acquires human features - for instance, it sacrifices material with a >>>view to gaining the initiative. So I am not at all sure that I will be a success >>>at this match. Of course, the world?s strongest chess players are better at >>>evaluating positions than computers, but people can get tired and get caught in >>>time trouble and so on. The end of the match will be the most difficult stage of >>>all. >> >>Kramnik: >>"I really believe that the computer will be >>a hard nut to crack." >> >>Kramnik: >>"The rumors that DeepFritz is a far cry from DeepBlue are >>not true to life." >> >>Kramnik: >>"I don?t think that DeepFritz is much weaker than DeepBlue." > > >Kasparov said _exactly_ the same thing _before_ the match. After the match, >he said "this was something totally new and unexpected." I agree, it is always tough to take GM at their word when talking about chess matches. Even when the opponent is not human. > >Which statement was correct? foresight or hindsight? I agree 100% > > > > >> >>Kramnik: >>"At some moments the machine >>really acquires human features - for instance, it sacrifices material with a >>view to gaining the initiative. So I am not at all sure that I will be a success >>at this match" >> >>The questions that crosses my mind when reading Kramnik?s statements: >> >>I. Is this hype for the upcoming match? > >It is fear of looking foolish. IE should he lose to Fritz, he _has_ to >say something to make it look no worse than Kasparov losing to Deep Blue. >He couldn't _possibly_ say "deep fritz is nowhere near deep blue" and then, >should the unthinkable happen and he gets blasted, have to face the public >after losing to something much worse than DB." My thoughts exactly. > > > > >>II. Does GM Kramnik really think he may not beat Fritz? >>III. How strong does GM Kramnik think Deep Blue was? > > >I'd bet he has _no_ idea, that he hasn't talked to anyone that really knows >anything about deep blue at all. He is either talking to the ChessBase guys >(the same ones that told Kasparov that if he practiced against Fritz he would >be well-prepared to play DB2) or talking to people that simply don't know. > >Either is not a big deal since he doesn't have to play deep blue, which means >that no matter what he says about DB, it won't be confirmed or disproven. Are you saying a Grandmaster can tell nothing about a programs strength, even when he can study the games? Are you saying Kramnik must be a chess programmer or a chess program expert to understad how strong computers play? I don't understand. > > > >>IV. Is GM Kramnik saying Fritz is competitive at the Elite GM level? >>V. Is GM Kramnik saying Fritz is a GM Level program? >>VI. Are we to take GM Kramnik statements as true in his own mind? > >When the coach of the #1 college team in the nation prepares to play the #30 >team, what does he say? "I expect we will blow them out without working up a >sweat?" or "I expect this to be a really tough game. They are going to be >motivated by our #1 rating, and they have some really superb players on their >offense and defense. We will be hard-pressed to win this game and probably >the team that gets the most lucky breaks will come away with the victory." > >Do you think the coach would ever say anything else? IE provide "locker room" >incentives for the opposing coaches to use? In that light, how would you take >Kramnik's comments? That is the Question, are we to take GM Kramnik at his word. I don't know GM Kramnik, so I can not make that judgement.
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.