Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 08:07:52 10/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 20, 2002 at 07:44:31, Chris wrote: >Hi Fernando, >I finished the book in one go like you in one week, and it was exciting. >However, I think you should watch out for drawing conclusions from what one man >tells you about things in the past. Hsu leaves out some facts, and (with some >exceptions) don't tell you very much about the games that Deep Blue lost. He all >the time has excuses when the computer loses, very much like some human chess >players actually. Uhh, what? He tells what happened. He didn't make excuses for the loss in '96, besides the fact that they needed a lot better evaluation to beat Kasparov. Bugs and freak accidents were the cause of many of their other losses, however. >If you read a man's memoires, you get his version. You shouldn't treat this like >it is the truth. It it not surprising that Hsu thinks that a later version of >Deep Blue would crush Kasparov. And it doesn't make it true that he thinks so. It doesn't make it not so. Kasparov DID lose in 1997, though he may not have played his best. With another machine, they could have made faster chips, improved the search efficiency, enabled many of the features they didn't have time to enable in 1997 (several evaluation features, hash tables for the hardware search, possible use of null move, etc.), and had much more time to tune the evaluation/search. >It doesn't surprise me either that he tries to make Kasparov look silly, but >actually I think Hsu is the silly one because of his attemps to rewrite history. Rewrite history?
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.