Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:11:03 04/11/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 11, 2002 at 14:34:20, Ed Schröder wrote: >On April 11, 2002 at 09:39:55, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 11, 2002 at 05:37:15, stuart taylor wrote: >> >>>On April 11, 2002 at 04:46:01, Ed Schröder wrote: >>> >>>>On April 10, 2002 at 17:57:25, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 10, 2002 at 17:28:34, Amir Ban wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 10, 2002 at 01:24:55, Joshua Lee wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=255 >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Kramnik may not know anything about programming but when he says Fritz was >>>>>>>suggesting objectively better moves than Deep Blue Played.....For someone of his >>>>>>>level of play to say such a thing. DB might have had extra knowledge than fritz >>>>>>>or any other program doesn't who really knows.....there is not enough >>>>>>>disclosure. Still i would like to see if anyone has found a position from either >>>>>>>match inwhich DB played a move that is out of Commercials grasp. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I am pretty sure this is like the thousandth message that asks this question. >>>>>> >>>>>>He was stating the obvious. Fritz6 and Junior6 were already stronger than DB, >>>>>>and I said so at the time. >>>>>> >>>>>>Amir >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Obvious to _whom_??? >>>>> >>>>>not anyone in "reality" I don't think... >>>>> >>>>>Or did I miss where Fritz6 and Junior6 beat kasparov in a 6 game match at >>>>>40/2??? >>>> >>>> >>>>Bob, take some good advice, you are going to lose this one. I agree, much has to >>>>do with wishful thinking, you can't fight that :) >>>> >>>>Ed >>> >>>Ed or others, how do you explain Bobs eloquent descriptions of the massive >>>amount of knowledge, not at expense of calculation speed etc. which was put into >>>DB? >>>S.Taylor >> >> >>He doesn't and he wasn't trying to. Re-read what he wrote. He described >>a "futile argument" problem. And note the ":)" which is important. :) > > >Bob, you missed the point, the argument itself isn't futile at all. I think the >majority (myself included) truly believes nowayds chess programs are clearly >superior to DB-97. Since nobody can proof himself being right, the thing doesn't >exist any longer, the wishful thinking starts. > >I consider you as the last of the Mohicans, when are you going to give up, 2010, >2020, ever? > >Please smile, for a moment I feel back in the good old days of 1996 and I won't >challenge you for another hysteric 1-100 game, I promise :) > >Ed I will "give up" when computers are capable of searching in the same speed range as DB2 which is an average of 200M nodes per second. At such a point, DB's tactical superiority will be in doubt due to recent results with null-move and other forward pruning approaches. By the time computers can search 200M nps, the evaluations will also be significantly more refined than they are today erasing that DB2 advantage as well... 2010 is probably an upper bound... maybe 2007 (10 years after DB2 played).
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.