Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 16:48:12 10/11/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 11, 2002 at 19:43:48, martin fierz wrote: >On October 11, 2002 at 17:28:08, Jeremiah Penery wrote: > >>On October 11, 2002 at 17:20:31, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On October 11, 2002 at 17:00:43, martin fierz wrote: >>> >>>>On October 11, 2002 at 00:25:27, K. Burcham wrote: >>>> >>>>>My question is, separate from all of this technical discussion, do you have >>>>>several moves that you have studied with todays programs that you know these >>>>>programs cannot find? >>>> >>>>perhaps it's more about moves that deep blue did not find: like h4? in game 1, >>> >>> >>>I do not think that another move could change the result and >>>I do not think that deeper blue could play better. >>> >>>I did not read that deeper blue had fortress detection in it's evaluation. >> >>The game was drawn before h4 was played. We can't say whether DB would have >>done better in avoiding the drawing setup, however. > >you are (very very) probably right about that the game was drawn before h4. but >this is not the point. it was easily drawn after h4. which means that h4 is a >mistake even if kramnik would have drawn the game otherwise, because it gave >away the advantage that white had. I think Kramnik said the game was absolutely drawn before then. But you're still right, that h4 only made it easier. >i didnt mean to say DB would have avoided h4. i just wanted to say that DF >played a bunch of weak moves up to now, and that i do not know of any moves >which are as bad that DB2 played in the match against kasparov. I was referring to Uri's comment, "I do not think that deeper blue could play better." That could be true. Unfortunately, there will probably never be a way to find the truth of that statement.
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.