Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 18:26:59 02/13/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 13, 2003 at 20:17:12, Pavel Blokhine wrote: >On February 13, 2003 at 17:28:42, Jorge Pichard wrote: > >>On February 13, 2003 at 17:21:20, Otello Gnaramori wrote: >> >>>And from the same source : >>>"In 1997, when IBM terminated the Deep Blue project, the computer-chess field >>>was left to talented enthusiasts. In the past five and a half years, new >>>programming techniques have combined with superior chess knowledge to create a >>>quality of machine chess that is far superior to that of Deep Blue." >>> >>> >>>w.b.r. >>>Otello >> >> >>Unfortunately, because Deep Blue's records were never made public it is quite >>useless to discuss the strength of Deep Blue vis-à-vis the strength of Deep >>Junior. IBM said Deep Blue crushed other programs, but what value are these >>statements without records? >> >>Yes, Deep Blue was 100 times faster, but so what? Sheer power means little in >>chess because it is a mathematically near-infinite game. The only way to measure >>the strength of a chess-playing computer is to analyze its moves. While putting >>Deep Blue's six games to the test with current top programs -- Deep Junior and >>Deep Fritz -- we discovered that they consistently play better than Deep Blue >> >>Yes, this is the only GM that can make this claim, NOT Kramnik, since Kramnik >>din't play against Deeper Blue. >> >>Pichard. > > >Pichard, > >Once again it's Deep Blue, not Deeper Blue as you're so persistant to write. >Even Kasparov who, like you said has a doctorate in chess, referred to it as >Deep Blue. So where do you get the Deeper from? It was often referred to as Deeper Blue, by the press, chessplayers, etc.
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.