Author: Robert Henry Durrett
Date: 08:04:16 06/03/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 02, 2002 at 23:45:26, Russell Reagan wrote: >I take your comments as saying basically that it's not fair if a computer >program gets to use something that isn't the "engine". Not really. >For example, you say that >it would be unfair (or at least pose that question) if Deep Fritz could make use >of a database of games during the match. If you are going to say that is an >unfair advantage, then Deep Blue also had an unfair advantage. When Deep Blue was playing Kasparov, I did feel that Deep Blue had an unfair advantage over Kasparov. After all, Kasparov was not allowed real-time access to any database during the games, whereas Deep Blue had access to a huge database. I remember that I really didn't like that at the time. I also recall being irritated by IBM's unwillingness to let Kasparov know anything at all about Deep Blue prior to the match. IBM seemed to not care about chess, or computer chess, but only wanted to do a publicity stunt. Or, so it seemed to me at the time. >Deep Blue >essentially won one of it's games over Kasparov because of an opening line >prepared by GM Joel Benjamin. A slight oversimplification. >So Deep Blue's "engine" didn't really beat >Kasparov that game, Joel Benjamin did. If you say so. > >This whole topic is very questionable, ???? > and it's hard to say for sure who beat >who or who has an "unfair" advantage over who. I think it's really a matter of >opinion. That's life! Nothing is ever "black and white." Being human means having feelings and opinions. We all do that. I think that’s OK. > >Russell Bob D.
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.