Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 23:55:46 09/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 02, 2002 at 19:12:20, Peter Kappler wrote:
>Jorge,
>
>If you feel you must post copyrighted material without the permission of the
>author, at least let us know whose work we are viewing.
>
>http://www.chessbase.com/columns/column.asp?pid=149
>
>-Peter
>
>
Sorry I forgot to post the link, I ussualy do.
Jorge.
>
>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.
>>
>>
>>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.