Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Kasparov's comment on losing to Deep Blue

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 08:23:09 07/16/02

Go up one level in this thread


On July 16, 2002 at 10:02:42, Rolf Tueschen wrote:

>On July 16, 2002 at 09:18:38, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On July 16, 2002 at 04:55:43, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>>
>>>On July 15, 2002 at 19:32:18, James T. Walker wrote:
>>>
>>>>On July 15, 2002 at 12:27:17, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On July 15, 2002 at 12:09:51, James T. Walker wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On July 15, 2002 at 09:38:23, K. Burcham wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Websters: "to make a person believe what is not true". "to be false".
>>>>>>>"deliberate misinterpretation of facts".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What do you think Kasparov means by "deceive the public".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Kasparov On losing to Deep Blue:
>>>>>>> "The Deep Blue match is the one people remember.
>>>>>>> It was not just a personal defeat but a disaster for chess. We allowed a
>>>>>>> computer giant to steal the result and deceive the public".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=410
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>kburcham
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I think Kasparov was implying that the Deep Blue team cheated.  He simply could
>>>>>>not accept the fact that the computer beat him fair and square.  There is no
>>>>>>medicine that can cure a bruised ego when it is world class in size.
>>>>>>Jim
>>>>>
>>>>>If that would be the case, we wouldn't have to face the situation that GM
>>>>>players have excluded CC from human tournament chess. They all agree with
>>>>>Kasparov that it wasn't DEEP BLUE2's strength alone.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Absolute nonsense!   "They all agree" ????  They can't all agree on ANYTHING.
>>>>Also GM players have not excluded computers from human chess tournaments.  Where
>>>>did you get that info?  GM players as a group can't agree on the time of day.
>>>>Jim
>>>
>>>Such hip-hop makes no sense. You were talking about a "bruised ego". Are you a
>>>psychiatrist? If not, then you might understand what I was talking about. Do you
>>>challenge me and think that there is _no_ evidence for what I've written? If
>>>yes, then let me give you three hints.
>>>
>>>1) Unzicker a famous German GM, BTW more famous than all the ex-Soviet GM in the
>>>USA together, spoke it out, what I wrote above.
>>>
>>>2) GM at the Dutch Championship denied to play FRITZ with different variations
>>>of boycott.
>>
>>Only a couple.  Not "all"...
>
>Right, I didn't write "all".
>

You did say "they all agree ..."




>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>3) The resolution of FIDE about machines in top event and also team
>>>championships.
>>>
>>
>>What about the "resolution" 10 years ago that computers could play if
>>they coughed up $10,000 to FIDE for membership?  Nobody did because it
>>was too much money.  So FIDE rescinded the option, probably hoping that
>>one day they would get asked again to open that back up and make some
>>money.
>
>It's always a problem to compare times, different centuries and the people
>involved in each case. It becomes quickly a multi-factor design.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Mathematically we still have no 100% but we have _more_ than "absolutely"
>>>nothing. ;)
>>
>>
>>Actually you have "very few".  I don't even think "most GMs" have given the
>>question any thought since it isn't an issue in FIDE events.
>>
>
>You'd find silent majorities wherever you look. I don't understand why you still
>think that relations between chessplayers and CC aren't a bit legless these
>days.
>

"a bit legless" doesn't explain what you mean here...



>Rolf Tueschen
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Rolf Tueschen



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.