Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Behind deep Blue

Author: Steffen Jakob

Date: 10:44:14 10/22/02

Go up one level in this thread


Hi!

On October 22, 2002 at 13:29:58, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>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
>
>It wasn't a "bad move" in the context of "it changed the result of the game"...
>
>"random" != "ridiculous" unless it is bad enough to cause a problem later...  I
>don't
>think it did in that game...

In Hossa's first serious tournament game against Nimzo (CCT1) I had a similar
bug. Hossa made two "random" moves (or better two one ply moves) because of a
bug in my permanent brain code. The first move wasn't that bad but the 2nd
ruined a won position.

1st 1-ply move:

[D]6k1/p4ppp/4p3/3p4/3PnB2/2PqP3/P5PP/1R2R2K b - - 0 22
22... g5

[D]
6R1/7p/4ppk1/p2p4/3P1B1p/2n1P3/q5PK/1R6 b - - 0 31
31... Kf7?? (31... Kf5 32. Rf1 Ke4)

In both cases I thought "this is ridiculous". But you are right, the quality of
a move doesn't depend on the fact if it was calculated by a deep search of
fantastillions nodes or by an ape who made the move randomly.

Greetings,
Steffen.



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.