Author: Derrick Daniels
Date: 22:50:01 08/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 29, 2001 at 21:57:55, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On August 29, 2001 at 17:41:13, Derrick Daniels wrote: > >>On August 29, 2001 at 14:03:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On August 29, 2001 at 13:52:33, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On August 29, 2001 at 12:52:15, Roy Eassa wrote: >>>> >>>>>This sentence DOES say a lot, doesn't it: >>>>> >>>>>"By the summer of 1990--by which time three of the original Deep Thought team >>>>>had joined IBM--Deep Thought had achieved a 50 percent score in 10 games played >>>>>under tournament conditions against grandmasters and an 86 percent score in 14 >>>>>games against international masters." >>>>> >>>>>That was 7 years before, and many-fold slower hardware (and much weaker >>>>>software, no doubt), than what played Kasparov in 1997. >>>> >>>>No >>>>This sentence tells me nothing new. >>>> >>>>I know that humans at that time did not know how to play against computers like >>>>they know today. >>>> >>>>Today programs got clearly better results than deep thought >>>>and there is more than one case when they got >2700 performance inspite of >>>>the fact that the opponents could buy the program they played against them >>>>something that Deep thought's opponents could not do. >>> >>>Deep thought produced a rating of 2655 over 25 consecutive games against a >>>variety of opponents. None of them were "inexperienced" in playing against >>>computers. Byrne. Larson. Browne. You-name-it. That argument doesn't hold >>>up under close scrutiny. In some ways, it appears that the GMs of today are >>>prepared far worse than the GMs of 1992 were prepared to play computers. >>> >>>In 1992 GMs _were_ encountering computers in various tournaments, from the >>>World Open, to the US Open, right on down to the state level. Today computers >>>are not playing in any of those... There were dozens of deep thought games on >>>the internet, so the humans had good ideas about the programs strengths and >>>weaknesses. >> >> >> >>Yes but in 1992 computers were laughed at, they were so weak, it's no comparison >>to today's programs and you know it. >> >> > > > >I don't know what planet you live on, but here on planet Earth, the GMs were >not producing positive scores against Deep Thought. They were _not_ laughing >at it. > >PC programs? lots of laughs. But not vs Deep Thought. > I tend to disagree, if I remember correctly , Grandmasters were laughing at some of the moves of game 1 Deeper Blue vs Kasparov 97. My information comes from the june issue of chess life 1997 > >>> >>>DT was just very, very strong. And DB/DB2 were both _far_ stronger. >>> >>> >>>> >>>>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.