Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Is Deep Blue still considered better than Deep Junior ?

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 17:50:03 08/18/02

Go up one level in this thread


On August 18, 2002 at 14:08:29, Uri Blass wrote:

>On August 18, 2002 at 12:41:58, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>On August 18, 2002 at 11:31:54, Chris Taylor wrote:
>>
>>>On August 18, 2002 at 09:06:02, Jorge Pichard wrote:
>>>
>>>>   Kasparov proved that he can defeat programs at fast time controls when he
>>>>defeated Deep Thought in a game/90 two games match in 1989. This program was
>>>>weaker than Deep Junior is today, as it searched well over 2,000,000 NPS, but
>>>>didn't have as much chess knowledge as Deep Junior.  He also defeated Deep Blue
>>>>in 1996. This program is obviously much faster than Deep Junior is today, but in
>>>>my opinion Deep Junior still has more chess knowledge than Deep Blue had back in
>>>>1996.
>>>>
>>>>PS: It is hard to compare Deep Blue of 1997 vs Deep Junior of today, but in my
>>>>opinion Deep Junior Chess Knowledge could make up for the difference of Deep
>>>>Blue super calculating power of 1997.
>>>>
>>>>Pichard.
>>>
>>>One way would be to play some games with Deep Blue and Deep Junior.  Guess that
>>>would settle once and for all who is the strongest.  Or would it just pour fuel
>>>on the **whos** best fire.  Put together the blue box and match it up.  After
>>>all it did beat the best player in the world at that time!  The advert could be
>>>quite powerful.  The machine that beat Kaspy goes for Junior. Methinks there
>>>could be some money to be made here? So this may not happen, shame?
>>
>>that will of course never happen. Just like fischer still is world
>>champion, deep blue will be world champion in some scientist eyes forever
>>too.
>>
>>To be clear. I feel that any 2650+ player of todaywill wipe out fischer
>>if he plays like he played in 1970.
>>
>>New theory, better tactics, more insight in strategies, better training.
>>
>>A 2650 player of today is going to crush any world champ from before Karpov
>>of course. No doubts.
>>
>>Robert J Fischer when the rating list started had 2780 or something. that was
>>superb compared to anyone in those days. He was the best back then. No one
>>was as good.
>>
>>But the level has improved a lot. Many will say now: "this is not a fair
>>compare a modern 2650 player against someone who had only an old
>>book from capablanca and tarrasch, if he could read german anyway".
>>
>>In fact a grandmaster did this comparision. He compared a top tournament
>>in 1991 with a top tournament from 1920. The grandmaster was called Nunn
>>if i remember well.
>>
>>The last few players in that tournament around the start of the 20th
>>century, they simply blundered away piece
>>after piece. Would be rated at most 1500 nowadays.
>>
>>The 'better players' in the tournament, considered *clear world top*
>>back then, they blundered on average 5 times a game.
>>
>>*no modern topgrandmaster is doing that*.
>>
>>The level of the world top increases. This is logical. Suppose you
>>get to the tennis court with a wooden racket. Even if you're called
>>John McEnroe you will be of course get completely annihilated. A wooden
>>racket and services of 160KM/hour (the speed at which McEnroe served) it
>>is no compare to the 180-220 KM/hour services of modern tennis of today.
>>
>>He won't manage a single break of course.
>>
>>This is logical. Sport progresses. computerchess even faster. saynig that
>>deep blue/deep thought was good in its days is justified. It beated some
>>GMs. That the GMs played big shit games because they cared shit as they
>>had nothing to proof and would get money anyway, that's no issue here.
>
>I agree that there is progress in chess but
>there was a tournament in 1988 that Deep thought won and at least
>in that tournament the games were important for the GM's because
>getting the first place could give them money.
>
>Uri

But this is something which always happens. The first time you play a
youth talent he kicks butt against GMs the second time they are prepared
for him. Computers this is even worse. They played childish against the
thing. It wasnt *that* bad that it blundered away pieces on the left and
right.

Genius won a few games from kasparov in the blitz around that time. Now
don't do as if that's normal. Genius was at a few Mhz.

My blitz rating as a FM is already hundreds of points higher than that
computer that beated kasparov in blitz a few games.



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.