Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 03:08:58 10/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 23, 2002 at 14:54:09, martin fierz wrote:
Good point. But he played 8 bad games this Kramnik guy.
How big is the chance for 8 bad games in a row at 40 in 2?
Of course the first few he won because his default technique
is so much better than that of software.
Only complete sleeping people will fail to see that the
level of both Kasparov-Deep Blue, which was around 2000
level, and Kramnik - Fritz which was around 2300 level,
that this is close to 2800 level.
The computer has simply weak spots. Kramnik from nature
plays a kind of games which show weak spots in programs.
His play is boring. He is a boring world champ. Though
from my viewpoint i really appreciate looking after his
games against humans, what he is doing here in this
match is simply too sick for words again.
The only good thing is that the match is already forgotten
by the world. Only at CCC we remember it.
The real match is Kasparov - Junior.
I expect also Kasparov to play under his level there. However
he has to show at least some 2600+ games to win. Kasparov
from nature, as we all knows, plays an open aggressive tactical
style where the computer plays well.
Against Deep Blue he could get away by some 2000 shuffling.
Missing obvious 2100 winning plans (like Ng5-h5?? he played instead
of the obvious blitz level winning plan Be3 to prevent Nd4) and
game 1 he even won by doing nothing. just 3 rows. Incredible.
"anything wins" he thought then.
Kramnik at least had a smarter tactic. First get a few points, then
give away some material to get to 4-4.
>On October 23, 2002 at 11:26:38, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On October 23, 2002 at 05:08:11, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>
>>>On October 22, 2002 at 17:29:53, martin fierz wrote:
>>>
>>>let's be clear. the kramnik guy was happy to receive
>>>a million dollar in advance. Without much effort he played
>>>a few moves and it was 3-1. Then everyone started complaining
>>>that the match got no publicity and got no excitement.
>>>
>>>He then gives away a piece in a clear drawn position with
>>>a 1b trick (1 check in between). That's bullet blunder level.
>>>
>>>In fact i don't make such mistakes that much at bullet and
>>>last time i made such a mistake at slow level was a year or
>>>10 ago. Kramnik had plenty of time.
>>>
>>>0% chance he didn't deliberately blunder there.
>>
>>I think that is a totally stupid statement to make. I can point out GM blunders
>>in _every_ tournament I have watched online. I have seen them overlook a mate
>>in 2. A hanging queen. You-name-it. Human GMs _do_ make mistakes. Not as
>>often as non-GM players, but also far more often than "never".
>
>bob, of course human players make mistakes. but GM != GM. kramnik is way beyond
>your average GM. i challenge you to find a tournament game ("normal" time
>control, not rapid chess) by kramnik in the last 5 years where he made such a
>blunder without time trouble. i'd be surprised if you found one :-)
>(but i'd really like to know the answer to that one!)
>
>i'm not going to say he threw the game. but i am going to say that the DF team
>was *extremely* lucky to get this kind of present by kramnik - i'd say this kind
>of mistake happens to him once in 800 games rather than once in 8 on average...
>
>aloha
> martin
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.