Author: K. Burcham
Date: 07:06:16 09/19/05
Pretty remarkable, and it shows that they were extremely strong compared to everyone else during that period. DB was just "a lot faster, and a lot smarter" than deep thought. It was (and would still be) competitive... Robert Hyatt Robert, you have always had "faith" in Deep Blue playing in a tournament against todays programs. What do you base this on? Mostly just a gut feeling? Is there a game that you were impressed with Deep Blue knowledge? Maybe just the fact that Deep Blue held its own against Kasparov? I read your point that you thought Deep Blue was strong for several years, but its competitors may not do so well against todays programs. Maybe you are saying that with improvements between 1997 and 2005, Deep Blue would be very strong today. Are you saying that Deep Blue, exactly the way it was in 1997 would be competitive today, with its 1997 search depth and 1997 knowledge? I am a fan of Deep Blue, its hardware and what they accomplished. I have spent days trying to find a line or move that todays programs will not play. I cannot find this, in fact we know that Deep Blue could not see 44.Kh2 wins in game 2. Instead Deep Blue played the draw move 44.Kf1. The knowledge and depth was not there to avoid this move. Todays programs also will not play this with winning eval. Some will play, but like you said once, not for right reason. [D] R7/1r3kp1/1qQb1p1p/1p1PpP2/1Pp1B3/2P4P/6P1/6K1 w - - 0 44 2006 Unlimited World Open Fruit 2.2 Zappa 2.0 Deep Fritz 9 Crafty 21.4 Deep Blue 3.1x Shredder 10 Hiarcs 10.2 Deep Junior 10 kburcham
This page took 0.18 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.