Author: Graham Laight
Date: 09:21:28 01/13/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 12, 1999 at 09:23:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 11, 1999 at 21:15:47, Graham Laight wrote: > >>On January 11, 1999 at 09:33:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>>In the last game kasparov simply replaced the order of moves. >>>>He played a line that he recommended not to play in his book. >>>>This is not something that he does all the time. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>Or, depending on who you believe, Kasparov tried that sequence of moves out >>>against Fritz over and over and won every game, even if fritz did sacrifice >>>the piece on e6. To date no computer has been able to win the white side of >>>this game against a strong human (or computer) opponent. So even this game >>>shows that DB is fearsome... >> >>I have seen a lot of great wisdom and straight talking common sense from Bob >>posting on the newsgroups over the years. Mostly, I agree with him - even when >>I'm on the other side of the discussion. >> >>But on this occasion - come on Bob, who are you trying to kid? >> >>At the risk of breaching copyright, I quote directly from the book "Kasparov V >>Deeper Blue" by Daniel King. >> >>*** Start Of Quoted Text *** >> >>Although this has been seen a few times at grandmaster level, it is known to be >>a mistake because of... >> >>8 Nxe6 >> >>Garry shook his head in disbelief. >> >>He had made a finger-slip allowing a known sacrifice which, of course, was all >>in Deep Blue's database. >> >>*** End Of Quoted Text *** >> >>This was written not only by a chess GM, but also a man who was watching Garry >>on the video monitor. >> >>I think that most of us would conclude that Garry made a mistake. Daniel's >>description is incongruent with the concept of a man with a secret plan who is >>playing a computer that has no idea about the opponent's emotional reactions. >> >>Graham. > >I am basing my comment only on comments by the Kasparov team before/after the >match. I don't claim that my conjecture is true. I only claim that it is >possible. IE at one of the ACM events, I sat across the board from Ken Thompson >helping him analyze a position. He was playing "nuchess" in a decisive game and >needed a win to win the tournament. He found a line that looked good and wanted >other opinions. It was based on the idea that a computer will often give up a >piece to win a rook on h1, but it doesn't realize that the knight that captured >on a1 is trapped and gets lost eventually. We tried the position on Cray Blitz >and it fell for it. So we assumed that Nuchess would also since they weren't >as fast. They did, Belle won. > >It is certainly possible that as Kasparov played game after game against Fritz >when preparing for the event, that he noticed that this position could arise and >that as black, he could thump fritz every time. And feeling desparate enough >in game 6, he could certainly have tried to unleash his "trap" only to have it >backfire. > >I make no claim this is true. Or that it is even probably. I don't know. But >I do know it is definitely 'possible'. I have seen humans do this many times >against computers. One statement Kasparov made was _really_ revealing however. >Before the match, he made a statement that he thought that DB would be able to >beat fritz 80-90% of the time. From results reported by Hsu, this was more than >just a little "low". And it could most definitely have led to trying something >unsound. > >And let me point out once again, after playing Nxe6 as white, to date no >computer has been able to win with the white pieces, against another computer >or against strong human opposition. Which means that it is certainly possible >that Kasparov had noticed this and hoped for a swindle. > >That's all I said. With no idea of how probable it is that this actually >happened. But in light of the above, you'd have to agree that it is certainly >not an impossible scenario? OK - it's not impossible. But if it is true, then I don't know what sequence of moves Gary was expecting. As the game progressed towards conclusion at move 19, it is said that Gary sat there looking more and more upset. >I've done this against computers. At USM we used to have monthly chess club >tournaments, and when we had an odd number, we would slip in a computer, like >the Novag supercon or whatever. And I generally won these games because I'd >do just such planning. :)
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.