Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 16:58:14 10/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 10, 2002 at 19:19:07, Wayne Lowrance wrote: >On October 10, 2002 at 18:26:28, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On October 10, 2002 at 18:15:48, Jorge Pichard wrote: >> >>>On October 10, 2002 at 18:06:12, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On October 10, 2002 at 15:00:33, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 10, 2002 at 11:25:53, Graham Laight wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Considering that Fritz lost two of the first four games, and drew the other two, >>>>>>winning three of the remaining four games (the minimum needed to win the match) >>>>>>is a tall order. >>>>>> >>>>>>-g >>>>> >>>>>At this point even one more draw and a win is better than what most of us here >>>>>expected from Deep Fritz. I still have hope for DF to win the first game of the >>>>>match, and as Kramnik becomes more fatigue the better the chances for Deep Fritz >>>>>to win one single game. This is a great accomplishment for Deep Fritz team to be >>>>>able to draw at least 3 games, considering that Kramnik had the actual program >>>>>before the match. This performance is much better than Deeper Blue of 1997, >>>>>considering the condictions set before the match for Kasparov. >>>>> >>>>>Pichard. >>>> >>>> >>>>No way DF could surpass the result posted by DB in 1997. It might _equal_ that >>>>result if >>>>it manages to win. But not if it gets drubbed as it has in the first four >>>>games... >>> >>>Kasparov would have also drubbed Deeper blue if he was allowed to play against >>>deeper Blue for at least a month before the match started. Lets NOT just count >>>the # of Win or Draw here, lets consider the case under the same circunstance. >>> >>>Pichard. >> >> >>Based on what? The match rules would _still_ have allowed modifications to be >>made between rounds. But Kasparov couldn't possibly have played against Deep >>Blue >>until it was completed, which happened a week or so prior to the match. > >I have stayed out of this DB thing. But I would have to guess that DB would not >have won the match if it was held at a later date with the same rules that DF >has to live with. Just conjecture of course, but this whole match has pissed me >off from the very start because of the rules, unfair I think > >Wayne This is a classic case of "self-screwing". :) The conditions are ridiculous, and the match can be called the same now, since we _knew_ how it was going to turn out, given the conditions that are in effect. This might have been interesting, had it been held 15-20 years into the future, when the computers are _really_ going to be difficult to beat. But not today. Going from the total lack of preparation in the DB match, to this farce, is simply too big a jump. There is a _lot_ of room in the middle of this mess that would be less unfair to the computer or the human.
This page took 0.01 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.