Author: Anthony Cozzie
Date: 07:50:57 05/08/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 08, 2004 at 07:18:27, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >On May 08, 2004 at 04:34:40, Sune Fischer wrote: > >> >>>>You are absulutely right. >>>>It is obvious that humans already solved chess so they know if a move is a >>>>blunder or not a blunder so you can be sure that all the question marks are >>>>correct. >>>> >>>>It is also obvious that the number of mistakes is what decides the game so if >>>>your opponent did 2 mistakes you can let yourself to do one mistake like letting >>>>him to force mate and you are not going to lose. >>>> >>>>:_( >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>You know, Uri, I have never seen you do anything but post how other people are >>>wrong (never with any reasons of course). Many other people have noticed your >>>unending flood of negativity. It is difficult to consider this post as anything >>>other than a flame. It appears I am going to have to take off the kid gloves >>>and dispose of you. >> >>Isn't it natural to only post if you disagree? >> >>Anyway, I suspect Uri has a point. >>It's not unusual for computers to play "unatural" moves, just think of the >>Hedgehog Junior played against Kasparov. >> >>All the time the GM's were saying how strange Junior's moves were, how "it >>showed no understanding of the position" blah blah blah. >> >>So please explain why Kasparov suddenly had to fight for a draw after 10 >>questionmark moves from Junior! >> >>-S. > >I never thought this day would come - but I agree with Uri here. :-) > >Sports aren't about beautiful play. Sports are about winning. If someone is >playing ugly, and winning, then it's your sense of aesthetics which needs to be >reviewed. > >Computers have a long history of winning ugly. In the recent Fritz-Kasparov and >Junior-Kasparov matches, the machines made many many more "mistakes" (according >to human opinion) than Kasparov. But - if these mistakes aren't punished - are >they really mistakes? Is it a mistake to leave Shaq wide open for three point >shots? (Or send him to the line for "free" throws?) It's impossible to speak >about objectivity here. You can only look at the results. > >Vas Let's take a look at some of the moves the annotator didn't like: [D]r2q1rk1/pp1n1ppp/2pbpn2/3p3b/8/1P1PPNPP/PBPN1PB1/R2Q1RK1 b - - 0 10 Zappa plays the obvious 10 ...e5. Deep Blue played 10 ...h6. I won't call this a bad move, but it's clearly a pass move. 1... e6-e5 2. e3-e4 Rf8-e8 3. Rf1-e1 Ra8-c8 4. a2-a4 h7-h6 5. Bb2-c3 Qd8-c7 6. a4-a5 Bd6-c5 7. Qd1-b1 = (0.25) Depth: 12/34 00:01:09.00 41299kN [D]r4rk1/pp1n1pp1/2pbpn1p/q2p3b/8/PP1PPNPP/1BPN1PB1/R3QRK1 b - - 0 12 Once again Zappa wants e5. Deep Blue played Bc7, which is a pass move at best, and I would think the bishop is actually better on D6. 1... e6-e5 2. c2-c4 Qa5-a6 3. d3-d4 e5-e4 4. Nf3-h4 Ra8-e8 5. Nh4-f5 Bd6-c7 6. Ra1-c1 Nd7-b6 7. c4xd5 Nb6xd5 = (0.24) Depth: 11/32 00:00:49.38 30722kN [D]r4rk1/ppbn1pp1/2p1pn1p/q2p3b/7N/PP1PP1PP/1BPN1PB1/R3QRK1 b - - 0 13 And Zappa is still dying for e5 :) Deep Blue played g5?, which cannot be considered anything but a blunder. 1... e6-e5 2. c2-c4 Ra8-d8 3. c4xd5 Nf6xd5 4. d3-d4 f7-f5 5. Nh4xf5 Rf8xf5 6. e3-e4 Rf5-g5 7. e4xd5 c6xd5 = (0.26) Depth: 11/32 00:00:42.90 26529kN Lets be clear: no one will ever know exactly how strong Deep Blue was. All we have are the games, and those are not convincing. anthony
This page took 0.03 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.