Author: Tony Werten
Date: 09:44:14 01/27/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 26, 2003 at 21:19:16, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >On January 26, 2003 at 21:08:27, Peter McKenzie wrote: > >>On January 26, 2003 at 20:49:52, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >> >>>On January 26, 2003 at 20:44:36, Peter McKenzie wrote: >>> >>>>On January 26, 2003 at 20:02:05, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>> >>>><snip> >>>> >>>>>>>Yes, let me again repeat the repeated: "humans are still *far* stronger than >>>>>>>computers". >>>>>> >>>>>>You can say it as many times as you want but that doesn't make it true. >>>>> >>>>>Kasparov's performance does. >>>> >>>>You make this conclusion from one game? That is rather funny. >>> >>>It is not exactly a conclusion; but rather a prediction of the conclusion :-) >> >>Right, glad we got that clear. Still, I wouldn't get too excited just yet. >> >>> >>>> >>>>What of the previous Kramnik-Fritz and Deep Blue-Kasparov matches? >>> >>>Kramnik - Fritz is irrelevant, it was the "not the strongest" human vs "not the >>>strongest" computer. >> >>Kramnik and Kasparov are not far apart in strength, the rating list tells us >>this. Ditto for Fritz/Junior and SSDF rating list. Therefore the Kramnik - >>Fritz match was very relevant to my way of thinking. >> >>>Deep Blue - Kasparov is even more irrelevant, as Kasparov >>>was so nervous he performed like an under 2600 player, and God knows what (who?) >>>Deep Blue had behind the scenes. >> >>Nervousness is a fact of life for humans, chess players in particular. A chess >>game decided by nerves is every bit as valid as one decided by opening >>knowledge, analytical ability, intuition, etc etc. Kasparov of all people knows >>this because he is usually on the other side of the nervousness! >> >>Can Kasparov control his nerves better this time around? Time will tell. > >In 1997 Kasparov knew nothing about his rival, he got "afraid" as he put it, and >so played the worst games of his entire career. That wasn't a match between the >strongest human vs the strongest computer. > >> >>I'm amazed you are giving any credit to Kasparov's 'behind the scenes' >>accusations. Personally I write them off as the ravings of a sore loser. > >When someone wins the 100 meters sprint Olympic gold, he has to do a drug test. >For computers the drug test is the logs. IBM released only partial logs of Deep >Blue, and that with a considerable delay. It's like taking a drug test several >days after the event... If you didn't ask this before the event, it might be hard to come up with the 2 hours after the match urine, 3 days later. Tony > >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Omid.
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.