Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 05:16:23 11/10/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 10, 1998 at 04:30:44, blass uri wrote: > >On November 10, 1998 at 03:47:08, odell hall wrote: > >> >> After The Last Game of the Match Between World Champion Garry Kasparov and >>Deeperblue, At the Press Conference Garry Announced "I want to assure everyone >>here that if deepblue were to start playing real chess, I personaly guarantee I >>would have torn it to shreds with no question". These words have echoed in my >>mind every since the match ended, I had no understanding of them then and I do >>not understand them now. What does garry mean by "real chess"?? I thought that's >>what was being played in the first place. I wonder if this was just the angry >>reaction of a man who has never expierenced defeat in match play, or if the >>statement has any truth. I am assuming that garry means that if deepblue were to >>play published games then other grandmasters could study the games and find >>weakness. However My understanding is that what makes deeper special and >>radically more sophisicated then it's predessor is it's ability to change it's >>style of play in mid stream, a credit to the Brillance of the deepblue team. My >>impression is that it was extremely presumptous of garry to say he would tear it >>to pieces! What is this evaluation based on? Is he making the statement based on >>his past expierences with strong computer programs, in which after several games >>he was able to find weakness and exploit them? The fact is that he was unable to >>repeat this strategy against deeperblue during the second match, so what makes >>him think he could do it at a future time? Personally I don't think Garry would >>have a chance against deeperblue in a future match > >1)He did not play the same program in the second match > >2)I looked at the games and the wins of deeper blue were not convincing > >In the second game of the match deeper blue won only because of a stupid mistake >of kasparov(kasparov resigned in a draw position because he believed the machine >can see everything in tactics > >In the last game kasparov did another stupid mistake when he played an opening >he was not prepared to play. > >I expected deeper blue to win before the match but I was dissapointed from >deeper blue and I expect gary kasparov to win the same deeper blue in a future >match > > >, The Machine has already >>demonstrated an unbeatable endgame and ofcourse garry's flair for tactics is >>useless against a machine that calculates 1 billion nodes per second! > >I do not agree because the machine proved it can miss tactical long lines(it did >not see the draw in the second game) > >Uri this is dead wrong. It overlooked a draw in game two that *kasparov* also overlooked. But when it played Be4 rather than Qb6, the move that Kasparov insisted won a pawn, it turns out that DB had seen a *very* deep draw there, one that Kasparov also overlooked. So to pick on deep blue for overlooking one of two deep draws seems a tad wrong when the current world champion overlooked *both* of them. No one says the machine has to play "perfect"... only "better"...
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.