Author: Chessfun
Date: 15:13:47 09/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 02, 2002 at 18:09:52, Jorge Pichard wrote:
> Simply because Kramnik can prepare with the exact version of Deep Fritz he will
>play in the match, while Deep Junior's team is free to make changes up till the
>clock is started.
>
None of the below;
Simply put I guess...it's Kasparov. Were the match Kasparov v Fritz then that
would be the more attractive, at least IMO.
Sarah.
>We are a month away from the dueling K vs. Machine matches in the Middle East.
>Kasparov leads off against Deep Junior in Jerusalem in a six-game match, and a
>few days later Kramnik faces Deep Fritz in Bahrain after a year's worth of
>postponements. In my informal e-mail poll the clear consensus was that the
>machines are going to be crushed. In fact, there was more contention about
>whether or not the computers would win a single game.
>
>
>This may seem strange at first, considering how well these programs have done
>against top GM competition in recent events, but I must agree with these
>conclusions for a number of reasons.
>
>1) It's Kramnik and Kasparov. World Champions and the only players ever to break
>the 2800 Elo mark, they would be favorites even without the other items on this
>list.
>
>2) GM preparation + program availability. A GM's preparation is usually somewhat
>canceled out by the other GM's preparation. This is also true in human-machine,
>and the programs' GM-prepared opening books will be ready for the K's. But the
>machine teams will have a harder time changing how their programs play, and
>since both are commercially available we can expect the K's to know these
>programs inside and out by match time.
>
>3) Anti-computer chess. This was a relatively unexplored concept back when
>Kasparov lost the second match against Deep Blue in 1997. The top players were
>used to being able to beat computers without any special strategies and even
>today they are a little embarrassed to skip the best move for one that is best
>only against a computer. In 1997, Kasparov's idea of anti-computer chess was to
>play lousy openings to get Deep Blue out of its book. These days the players
>know that if they can blockade the center ("eight-pawn chess") they'll have all
>day to set up a smashing attack on the computer's king. This is harder than it
>sounds, especially with black, but with enough practice a draw is the worst you
>have to fear. In several games in the past few years GMs using this strategy
>have made both Fritz and Junior look pathetic. (Yes, the computers have made the
>GMs look pathetic on a few occasions too.)
>
>4) Sheer power. Despite the lack of empirical evidence about its play, the fact
>remains that Deep Blue was many times faster than these micros. Even with its
>parallel architecture and searching up to a billion positions per second Deep
>Blue only edged an unrecognizable Kasparov, who resigned once in a drawn
>position and lost the final game with a bizarre opening blunder.
>
>Of the two matches, Kasparov-Junior seems to be the more attractive from a chess
>perspective, but this is not to Kasparov's credit. It's more attractive only
>because I can imagine Kasparov losing! Stylistically he is the ideal opponent
>for a computer team to face. The tactical style we mentioned above plays to the
>computer's strength and his legendary opening preparation can be partially
>nullified by the giant database Junior can access. (Novelties can be even more
>effective, however.) Kasparov is also a proponent of OTB chess psychology, which
>is quite ineffective against a machine.
>
>
>If computers have nightmares when in sleep mode, they have nightmares about
>playing Vladimir Kramnik. In addition to the obvious world-champion-2800
>attributes, he's solid, patient, and practical about doing what it takes to win.
>Big Vlad will be content to maneuver until he finds a weakness and he's
>sufficiently pragmatic to take a draw if he can't. Plus, he's big enough to
>chuck the damn machine out the window if he gets into trouble. It's also
>significant that Kramnik can prepare with the exact version of Deep Fritz he
>will play in the match, while Deep Junior's team is free to make changes up till
>the clock is started.
>
>
>Kasparov's opponent, Ban & Bushinsky's Junior 7, has a very aggressive and
>sacrificial style that is ideal for maximizing winning chances against a human.
>The performance of Morsch's Fritz 7 has shown it to be as strong, but more
>materialistic and "computer-like" in its play. The keys for both machines are to
>keep things open at all costs and complicate at every turn. What we know for
>sure is that neither program will miss the smallest tactical opportunity to whip
>humanity's collective butt. It will be very difficult for the K's to avoid such
>a slip over 14 games (six for Kasparov, eight for Kramnik). In a few days we'll
>hear dozens of opinions from readers and experts
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.