Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Robert question, Deep Blue 3.1x

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.