Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: A Blast from the past - DBII didn't win a single game!!

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 02:23:51 04/29/05

Go up one level in this thread


On April 28, 2005 at 23:17:46, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On April 28, 2005 at 22:01:24, chandler yergin wrote:
>
>>On April 28, 2005 at 20:30:36, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On April 28, 2005 at 15:17:13, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>>>
>>>>On April 28, 2005 at 14:12:33, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hsu didn't win.  Deep Blue "won".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>No.
>>>>
>>>>1. DBII lost in game one. Very badly. Kasparov's superior chess!
>>>>
>>>>2. Then Kasparov gave up a drawn game. He was very confused.
>>>>
>>>>3. Then three draws.
>>>>
>>>>4. Then Kasparov threw another game. He was no longer in the match since the
>>>>second game...
>>>>
>>>>So, where DBII WON a single game?
>>>
>>>The _official_ history of the match has DB winning rounds 2 and 6, losing round
>>>1, and drawing the rest.  What part of that is confusing?  If you want to play
>>>word games and say that the 1-0 result in round two means black lost rather than
>>>that white won, fine.  In round 1 DB lost, Kasparov didn't win.
>>
>>Could not the same thing be said about Game 6?
>
>
>That was my point.  That was Rolf's claim in fact.  It works both ways.  But
>whether DB won a game, or Kasparov lost the game, the final result is _exactly_
>the same...

The final result is not exactly the same in the meaning that if DB won games not
thanks to stupid errors of kasparov then the impression of the chess players
could be that DB is better than Kasparov and after the match the impression of
the chess players was not that DB is better than Kasparov.

Both mistakes of kasparov in the games that he lost are mistakes that kasparov
does not do against humans and both were result of not understanding the
machine.

In game 2 Kasparov believed that he has no chance for a perpetual check because
he believed that DB could see it after getting the impression that DB saw
another perpetual earlier in the game because it was the only way that kasparov
could explain DB's move to himself.
The result was that he even did not analyze this possibility.

In game 6 Kasparov played for a line that he was not ready to play.

DB did not get a losing position in game 1 because of a stupid error so the
story of game 1 is different.

The impression of the chess players after the match was that DBII was not better
than Kasparov at 1997 inspite of the results.

Uri



This page took 0.01 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.