Author: emerson tan
Date: 02:48:48 10/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 17, 2002 at 16:29:46, martin fierz wrote: >On October 17, 2002 at 08:13:38, emerson tan wrote: > >>On October 16, 2002 at 20:27:57, martin fierz wrote: >> >>>On October 16, 2002 at 17:57:10, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>> >>>>On October 16, 2002 at 17:53:25, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 16, 2002 at 16:43:53, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I find it tasteless that Hsu claims that Deep Blue was in a 'different >>>>>>class' from Fritz and that it was not match for them, when he has no >>>>>>ability to back it up and the only public things we have about the two >>>>>>show differently. >>>>> >>>>>How do they show differently? >>>> >>>>'very old' Fritz beat 'very old' Deep Blue >>> >>>...and in a shveshnikov book line at that which was in the fritz book and not in >>>the DB book AFAIK. using one game alone as a proof is not a good idea. and if >>>that game was decided by the better opening book, then it gets downright >>>ridiculous. >>> >>>aloha >>> martin >>> >>> >>Kasparov wasalso beaten by deep Blues opening book in game six and kasparov loss >>by a point. Thats one game up as proof also. Deep Blue team started claiming >>victory. downright ridiculous also? > >we are talking about very different things here. from ONE game you cannot claim >that anybody is better, like it was done from the DB prototype-fritz game. >in the kasparov match, we are not talking about claiming "DB is better than >kasparov", but about "DB won the match". you can NEVER argue with that kind of >thing - it happened, DB won the match. i'm not arguing that DB prototype did not >lose against fritz - only that it is meaningless. >BTW, if you ask me if i believe that DB was better than kasparov i would also >say no... > >aloha > martin Ok, got your point:)
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.