Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 09:40:35 10/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 22, 2002 at 12:09:10, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 22, 2002 at 11:54:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On October 21, 2002 at 19:18:40, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On October 21, 2002 at 18:24:44, martin fierz wrote: >>> >>><snipped> >>>>judging from the games, DF certainly didn't seem to be "much better than DB", >>>>which at least didnt produce such ridiculous moves as DF did :-) >>> >>>Deeper blue played a ridiculous move in the first game >>>of the match against kasparov because of a bug. >> >> >>What move was "ridiculous"?? Deep Blue could have _easily_ won that game with >>any tiny >>error by Kasparov, after the sac... > >I am talking about game 1 of the 1997 match. >Deeper blue played arandom move because of a bug in that game. > >Uri You really have to be a hard core CC nerd to keep up with these DB-DF discussions! ;) The only thing I consider obvious is that the issue cannot be settled, there are simply too many variables! From the technical point of view, the node counts differ, search differ, evaluations differ... Not to mention a lot of just as important factors: Opponents differ, in both style and knowledge. Kramnik had the machine and the program before hand, Kasparov knew nothing. Perhaps Kasparov was too insecure, perhaps Kramnik was overconfident, perhaps Kasparov had a bad day or he was tired, perhaps Kramnik couldn't sleep the night before because the aircondition was broken, perhaps he had an argument with his wife, perhaps he eate too much of that candy and got out of shape... Add to that the very sparse data available from DB, there is really nothing tangible to "discuss", so with about 50% chance of being wrong I prefer not even to form an opinion ;) -S.
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.