Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:38:07 09/06/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 2001 at 11:27:58, Wayne Lowrance wrote: >On September 06, 2001 at 10:48:42, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On September 06, 2001 at 10:00:52, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On September 06, 2001 at 08:22:23, K. Burcham wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>amazing game. i always look for moves that you played for the computer, >>>> to get the results you want. >>>> >>>>in this game, deep fritz chooses all the program moves that you list here. >>>> >>>>in your games that you sacrifice material for position, and your "every move >>>> advance toward king" methods, this makes your games look very easy for >>>> a human. and this makes these games look like you are playing an >>>> easy opponent. >>>> >>>>it seems that if these (all) programs are this vunerable to kingside >>>> attacks, then it would also seem that huebner (spelling?) could >>>> have used these methods in his comp games. and it would also seem >>>> that kramnik could use these methods in his upcoming match. >>>> >>>>and if kasparov is so good, and the king, and he used a comp for studies, >>>> then why didnt he use these methods with deep? are you going to >>>> say that deep would not choose these moves. are you going to >>>> say that deep would not fall for ...h5, and would develop >>>> its own attack. >>> >>> >>>Deep Blue is a different animal from Deep Fritz. First, it was at least >>>a hundred times faster. Which plugs several holes. Second, its evaluation >>>was developed and tuned while playing against human GMs, not against other >>>computers. That plugs several more holes. >> >>We do not know if it was a different animal because kasparov did not try h5 and >>he had the opportunity to try in game 2. >> >>I also doubt if GM's tried the idea of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 h5 >>against deeper blue. >> >>I doubt if tuning the evaluation based on games against humans could help >>because there is a lot of things that humans did not try. >> >>I also found that Deep Fritz could avoid the drawing mistake of Deeper blue in >>game 2 and the same for Junior and Tiger so claims that the evaluation of Deeper >>blue was different do not convince me. >> >>The fact that the evaluation of Deeper blue was different does not say that it >>was better and it is possible that it even could fall for king attack that Deep >>Fritz does not fall into if you play the relevant lines that kasparov did not >>know. >> >>We have no idea if kasparov could win Deeper blue in game 2 by h5 for the simple >>reason that kasparov did not try and everything is going to be a speculation. >> >>Uri >I like uri's thinking, usually makes sense to me. It get's a little bit on my >nerve's the praise Bob keep's piling on DB and his comparisons against modern >lil micro com programs always speed given as reason.... i"m not convinced Bob. I >think the Tiger's, Fritz's etall are a heck of a lot better than you give them >credit for, and yes even Crafty. No disrespect intended. > >Wayne When we see them play _evenly_ with Kasparov, I will agree. Right now, they are having one hell of a time trying to play evenly with Nemeth. Much less Kasparov.
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.