Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Corrections on Kramnik's "blunder" (Only for chess insiders)

Author: Rolf Tueschen

Date: 13:23:50 10/14/02

Go up one level in this thread


On October 14, 2002 at 15:07:55, Darren Rushton wrote:

>
>>>But Fritz is not in the same class as Kramnik. This is why the human player has
>>>problems.
>>>
>>>Rolf Tueschen
>
>Your point that some sort of "conspiracy theory" exists here is an interesting
>one. Certainly, if you believe anything Kasparov says about Kramnik, he has
>certainly "taken his eye off the ball" and seems more concerned these days with
>his own publicity.
>
>However, I can't convince myself why Kramnik would deliberately throw a game
>away - surely, he would go out of his way to mash Fritz to pieces if only to
>prove he was the best player in the World.
>
>I believe the day when a computer program can defeat the World Chess Champion in
>a match is drawing ever nearer, and what we are seeing is concrete proof of
>that.
>
>Darren

Yes, fine, but that is exactly the debate! The chess side does surely doubt you
opinion. And what I'm saying is simply this, such a blunder (Qc4) doesn't prove
any superiority of the machine. But such a blunder may have a special message.
Or in other words it is a message itself. And that was my point. I read the
message as a form of disdain. Now, I'm by far no clairvoyant. I don't know
Kramnik good enough. Darren, this is not because Kramnik has an axe to grind
with Fritz, you know! The ChessBase team perhaps becomes a bit annoying him. For
instance the 4th game. For me this was a win for Kramnik. Yes! You can't allow
such crashs just so that the machine could empty its hash. Or whatever else they
might have done. Do you know that this was all kosher?

Rolf Tueschen



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.