Author: Keith Ian Price
Date: 13:22:20 08/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
Hsu seems to admit that if Kasparov had been given a chance to study DBs games, he would have trounced it, all the while denying it: "Conventional thinking, Hsu said, has held that the evaluation speed is a sufficient condition for a good chess-playing machine. If you can evaluate enough combinations of moves to play farther ahead than your opponent, you should win. But Hsu warned that this is a misleading assumption." "'Such a strategy can work in tournament play, where no one has a chance to study your games and identify your weaknesses,' Hsu said. 'But in match play, your opponent will study your history. If you have mistakes, a grand master will study them, find the underlying weakness and drive a truck through it. Speed is important, but in match play it is more important to have few weaknesses and weaknesses that are hard to exploit.'" He goes on to say that that is why they made the evaluation of DB error-free. But if that's what he did, why did he not let Kasparov see any of the games with Joel Benjamin. The laughingstock reason he gave for this is pretty weak IMO. kp
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.