Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 19:30:01 12/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 16, 2002 at 20:08:00, Pavel Blokhine wrote: >On December 16, 2002 at 19:04:50, Wayne Lowrance wrote: > >>On December 16, 2002 at 18:51:56, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On December 16, 2002 at 18:28:39, Sally Weltrop wrote: >>> >>>>On December 16, 2002 at 17:49:08, John Sidles wrote: >>>> >>>>>http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=649 >>>>> >>>>>Kramnik says: >>>>> >>>>>> There were not so many games where [Fritz] played strangely. >>>>>> In many games it was simply like playing a strong human >>>>>> Grandmaster, it was absolutely normal, absolutely human play. >>>>>> In game five Fritz played very well, better than any human. >>>>>> It seemed almost equal, but it managed to keeping putting >>>>>> on this pressure all the time, it kept finding these >>>>>> very precise moves, not giving me a chance to get away. >>>>>> ... >>>>>> You can say Fritz is 2800, but you cannot measure >>>>>> it by numbers really. It's very strong, it's very >>>>>> very strong. But it depends on many things, especially >>>>>> the opening. In some positions, if it gets its positions >>>>>> you can make a draw or you can lose, two choices; you >>>>>> can never win. In some positions its 3000. Maybe you >>>>>> can suffer and make a draw. 10 Kasparovs and 20 Anands >>>>>> wouldn't help you in these positions. >>>>>> >>>>>> So on the average you can say 2800 or a bit more, >>>>>> but it matters what you get. If you get a position >>>>>> like what I had in game five then no human can fight it. >>>>>> But if you get what I had in game two then you have >>>>>> a chance. It very much depends on the opening stage. >>>>> >>>>>I am old enough to remember CCC posts in which people >>>>>argued about whether computers can play at grandmaster >>>>>level (just three years ago!). What will things be like >>>>>another ten years? >>>> >>>>u beat me to it. I was going to post this statement. it says it's over 2800? >>>> >>>>What is Deep Blue's rating then? This machine was certainly much faster & >>>>stronger that Fritz OR was it? :.) >>> >>>I do not believe a word of kramnik. >> >>Of course not ! >> >>>I believe that kramnik lost on purpose but I do not expect him to admit it. >> >>Very strong accusation my friend >> >>> >>>What he says in the interview simply does not make sense: >>> >>>"Objectively I think the final position of game six is losing, so I cannot say >>>that I resigned in a drawn position. Maybe a computer won't find a way to win >>>because it doesn't understand this fortress, but I cannot say I objectively >>>missed a draw." >>> >>>I do not think that the final position is losing but even if there is a win that >>>is very hard to find then resigning is a big mistake. >>> >>>It is not only that a computer will not find a way to win(this reason is good >>>enough not to resign). >>>I expect humans who understand the fortress to fail to see an idea how to win >>>the game. >>> >>>It is not enough to undersatnd the fortress in order to win but you also need to >>>find some plan to win. >>>It is a clear mistake to resign even against humans. >>> >>>Kramnik is simply lying in the interview. >>>His claim that the sacrifice can work against humans may be correct for weak >>>humans but I expect strong grandmasters to find the right defence. >>> >>>His claim that he made only one mistake is also wrong. >>>Kramnik had good winning chances against Fritz. >>> >>>Sacrificing the knight was probably one mistake and resigning was another >>>mistake in the same game. >>> >>>Uri > > > >I read an interview of Kasparov where he said that since Kramnik received a copy >of Fritz in Bahrain way before the match to test, any other result other than a >win will not be admissible. And I strongly agree. Kasparov was kept in secrecy >by the IBM team about Deep Blue and yet he outplayed the machine in almost every >game except that infamous and bizarre game 6. Kramnik should have beaten Deep >Fritz. And I find it weird that he out played the machine for the first 4 games, >and then couldn't manage a single win anymore. That's very bizarre. The Fritz >team weren't allowed to make modifications, so how did they managed to make Deep >Fritz change tactics and prevent the exchange of the queens? If I remember correctly, they were limited in the changes they could make. I don't think the limitations excluded modification of its opening preferences.
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.