Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 03:29:13 07/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 2002 at 05:52:42, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >I just wrote to Guy that psyche is most important in chess. What I wanted to >elaborate are the interdependencies of such events like DB2 in 97, the Dutch Ch. >and then the FIDE resolutions or non-resolutions if you prefer. Now, it's >impossible to "prove" it but then it was a stimulation for your own thought >processes as a reader. The likelihood of an accumulation of negative impressions and experiences is a possible explanation of the decisions made. However, not easy to validate and not exactly evidence of anything in particular. And it's fair to point out that your initial statement "They all agree with Kasparov that it wasn't DEEP BLUE2's strength alone." is dubious at best, so I think Walker's objections where quite accurate in that regard at least. >By far I want to be the one who will dominate a certain >singular theory. On the other side I wouldn't accept that I had to keep my mouth >shut until I could "prove" all ideas with mathematical exactitudiness. ;) Of course not :-). Regards, Mogens
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.