Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 04:36:08 03/15/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 14, 2002 at 15:47:09, Joe McCarro wrote: >On March 13, 2002 at 04:28:57, Daniel Clausen wrote: > >>Hi >> >>On March 13, 2002 at 04:09:54, Jerry Doby wrote: >> >>>It's hard to believe that anything can be that much strongeer then fritz7 on a >>>fast platform. Is deepblue 100 elo or above deepfritz on an xp 2000 >> >>No-one really knows, so don't expect facts in this thread here but mainly >>opinions. (this post excluded of course :) And the opinion will vary quite a lot >>too. ;) >> >>Sargon > >I can't agree more. Deep blue plays 6 games against 1 human and people think >they can rate it. Kasparov was losing to Kramnik by the same margin after six >against him. Pretend Kramnik 1)never played a game before that match and 2) >decided after game six he was never going to play again. Would we be asking how >our best programs would compare to him? Of course not, he would simply be a big >question mark. These questions are great and I love them but Deeper Blue's >history was way way to short to warrant any kind of intelligent discussion about >how good it might be. Deep blue only proved that it is *possible* that a >computer could come out ahead of Kasparov after six games in May of 1997. So >what? I have to agree. This was clearly a hit'n run attack on Kasparov. The thing came out of the blue (so to speak) without anyone knowing anything about it other than its speed. I think Kaspy was spooked to begin with, had the match been longer, say 24 games, Kaspy would have gotten to know his opponent better and maybe could have turned the match around. Afterall, Kaspy had the ability to adapt, DB did not. On the other hand, DB was probably not perfected to all it could have been. So in the end we know who won, but we don't know who was the best... -S.
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.