Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 06:42:50 07/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 21, 2002 at 23:45:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 21, 2002 at 14:40:35, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On July 21, 2002 at 08:05:33, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On July 21, 2002 at 07:32:32, Geo Disher wrote: >>> >>>>OK after 56 hours the evals are exactly the same .88 for axb5 and Qb6. >>>>Hopefully in another few days axb5 will surpass Qb6. >>> >>>It is not clear if axb5 is better than Qb6. >>>I believe that it is not better. >> >>Exactly the reason why Kasparov became suspicious. >> >>Ed >> > >I suspect we can find _many_ positions where Kasparov made a move that >was inferior. I saw him do it several times in match 1 against DB in >fact. So I don't quite understand why _he_ thinks that his analysis/ >opinion is so infallible that because _he_ believes Qb6 was better, it >actually was. This is again something for the private tutoring. Lesson 60. Bob's logic says that both make mistakes. DB2 _and_ Kasparov. And therefore Kasparov has no right or extra-right or simply the status to declare or pretend that he has a higher position to judge about chess variations. Although Kasparov is the best player, actually. True logic: we must at first introduce the parameter of overall chess strength. Here Kasparov is leading the ranking lists. So, there is a direct connection between chess strength and the quality of judgements about moves or lines in chess. Now let's take a look at DB2. Except the 6 games from 1997 we have not a single gamescore of the practice of the machine. The first game of the show event reveiled that DB2 was as weak as typical machines. Some moves were absolutely nonsense. The main line leading to its loss wasn't foreseen, which is typical for machines. Verdict. Kasparov is the far better player than DB2. While DB2 is or better was a good calculator, so that no amateurs were able to play it successfully, but since its understanding of chess is infantile a good GM with eidetics and good calculation is far better. If it comes to "judging lines" Kasparov is of outstanding class compared with the idiot savant DB2 who must rely on the telephone book like databases, features called 'forbidden' in human chess. Chess is more than calculating till the point of definite blindness. Chess is knowledge and experience. "Eidetics helps, but without the chess genius eidetics is simply computerchess" (Tueschen July 22th, 2002). > >Fritz seems to be exposing that as false. Had I run Crafty long enough >it would also probably have liked axb5 since the scores of the two moves >were heading in opposite directions, albiet a bit slowly. For all I know, you would have run this test _if_ it had been sure the result would have shown what you expected... Concerning our general addiction *time* should be no obstacle! BTW do you know where the game scores are from the 10:0 tests of DB2jr or sen against some commercial progs? Just take your time for the search. Thanks. Rolf Tueschen > > >> >>>Uri
This page took 0.03 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.