Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:21:39 01/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 30, 2003 at 09:09:18, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On January 30, 2003 at 09:00:19, Matthew Hull wrote: > >>On January 30, 2003 at 07:00:35, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >> >>>On January 29, 2003 at 22:30:38, Matthew Hull wrote: >>> >>>>Negative. He is paid because he is strong, _the_ strongest. That's what is >>>>wanted. That is what is hired. His reputation is on the line. >>> >>> >>>That is wrong and I can prove it. Kasparov is possibly the strongest human chess >>>player _against_ other human players, although I doubt it because Kramnik is >>>stronger, but this is not the question here. It's true that Kasparov is very >>>strong against other human players in human chess. But he's not the strongest >>>player against computers! Simply because his lack of self-control. Pulling faces >>>is both impolite and against the known chess ethic. >> >> >>Perfectly blithering, Rolf. > >Ok, I will also discuss with you although it's then in the second division only. > > > >> >> >>>No matter how authentic it >>>might be in the eyes of the spectators. And more - against computers it's >>>_absolutely_ worthless! >>> >>>The sole reason for Kasparov being the most wanted partner in computer chess >>>show events is the intention to make the public believe that the strongest human >>>player is automatically the strongest computer opponent - which is provenly >>>false! >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>His reputation >>>>suffered badly from DB2. If he throws games, then he has dishonored his >>>>contract, his principles, his reputation and his soul. That's just not >>>>happening with this guy, IMO. >>> >>>I didn't say that he throws games. >> >> >>Yes you did. You said he tossed a safe win (f4) to keep the match interesting. >>That would be "throwing" a game. You contradict yourself. > > >Throwing a game is losing a game, if you don't mind? > > > >> >> >>>Keep your data straight, please. But it's >>>true that all show event partners among human chess players have 'helped' the >>>programs to win some points - from the beginning on of such show events. >>> >>>Here is a sentence nobody can deny: >>> >>>====If it's true that only now the commercially available chess programs are >>>strong enough to win games against the best humans, then how could it happen >>>that already 30 years ago the first programs and board computers won points?=== >> >>The "if" statement here returns a FALSE. So your conclusion "code" would never >>be executed and is therefore irrelevent. > >So? Also the first commercial progs were strong enough? Please do not choose >such a deep level here. Thanks. > > > >> >>> >>>Please explain that fact! How could it happen if the human chessplayers didn't >>>help? With strength alone that could never have happened because the first >>>programs were stupid as hell. But again prove me wrong. I wait for your answers. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>IBM took a risk in hiring the strongest guy in the world to play their monster. >>>>They gambled and won. You can bet he was not throwing games then. The >>>>situation is the same. He has something to prove. >>> >>> >>>What should he have to prove? >> >> >>That he is the strongest chess player, period, regardless of who is the >>opponent. > >Exception Kramnik to whom he lost a match. Period. > > > >> >> >>>We are not talking about human chess. We are >>>talking about computerchess. And there he is definitely NOT the best opponent, >>>perhaps the best partner - in economical terms of business, yes. >>> >>>And a final sentence you can't deny too: >>> >>>===Why could Kasparov prove what he's worth in chess (computer version!) if he's >>>now playing a program that is factor x plus a dozen aspects WEAKER than DB2? How >> >> >>So you admit it. DB2 was the strongest program. >> >>To answer your question, it is a matter of public perception. Junior is the >>current Computer world champion. GK will want to establish his superiority over >>the "strongest" computer competition. >> >>See? Very simple. > > >See? Very simplicistic? > >Rolf Tueschen > >P.S. If I'm on vacations as a boy, the other boy could pester my little baby >sister and claim being strongest in town? Hehehe... Deeper blue is dead and not in vacation. Uri
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.