Author: stuart taylor
Date: 18:11:25 10/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
So how can anyway say anything about the strength of Deep Blue because of 6 games with Kasparov? 1).According to what people in this forum (e.g. Christophe) believe, Deeper Blue could very very easily be no more than 2300 ELO. According to all that, Fritz could also easily be 2600. 2).And what would happen if a human got tired after 20 games, and had to play another 80 games to make 100? The computer might start gaining very great plusses. (in our case, Kasparov in 1997 would have started winning more, and Kramnik would start losing). S.Taylor On October 09, 2002 at 18:46:21, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 09, 2002 at 17:48:43, Jason Jarrells wrote: > >> >> >> After what I have seen, I have NO doubt in my mind what so ever, that DEEP >>BLUE is superior to Deep Fritz. I am so tired of people saying that Fritz is >>superior to Deep Blue... That is total BS.. What do they base it one? I mean >>do they compare Hardware? LOL.. Deep Blue looked at 200,000,000 moves a >>second. Fritz sees 3,000,000 a second. Deep Blue gives Kasparov all he can >>handle and them some. It WINS!!! Deep Fritz on the other hand is getting >>OWNED!! TOTALLY ABUSED!! Kramnik isn't that much better then Kasparov. Some >>people say that Kasparov just can't play against computers. I don't buy that. >>We will se in a couple months. IF he abuses Deep Junior as Kramnik is to Fritz, >>then will that answer the questions about the strength of Deep Blue? That will >>be the strongest in my mind untill something can win over the best GM's. Or >>untill they put Deep Fritz on Deep Blue's hardware. Then and ONLY then will >>Fritz be stronger then Deep Blue. > >There is going to be no proof so why do you insist to discuss it. > >You cannot compare kasparov of 1997 with kasparov of today and there is no way >to do a match between them. > >You cannot compare the matches when kasparov trained against Junior(inspite of >the fact that he could not train against the version that he is going to play) >and kasparov could not train even against Deep blueI before the match against >deep blue II. > >I guess that kasparov is going to beat Deep Junior 4-2 but it is not going to >prove nothing. > >The reason that people believe that Deep blue is weaker is that they found no >impressing move in the moves of deep blue against kasparov(there is no >impressive moves that top programs need hours to find). > >I agree that it is not a proof but we are not going to have a proof in the near >future. > >Uri
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.