Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 10:49:03 04/22/99
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 1999 at 13:33:18, Chris Carson wrote: >Who is number 1? > >Fritz beat Deep Blue in the last WCCC. >Kasparov beat Karpov and Anand for World Chess Champion Titles. >Deep Blue II beat Kasparov in the last match, but Deep Blue II >has not beat Fritz in a public match (private match perhaps, but >who can say, where are the games?). Kasparov used Fritz as a >sparing partner in preparation for the DBII match (where are the >games? who won these games? no facts). > >Deep Blue II ducks the current WCCC. Well I guess we will never have >an answer based on facts. So who is number 1 in your opinion? > >Fritz, DBII, Kasparov, or winner of 1999 WCCC? > >It will be easy to pick DBII becaus of blah, blah, blah or Kasparov >for the same reasons (perhaps valid), but my opinion is that Fritz >is the champ until some program (or person) knocks it off the top >based on a public match. I like CM6K myself, but it can not be champ >if it does not compete. In my opinion. The ranking "Number one" is a foolish idealism we make just to add spice to life. It has very little meaning anyway. With the #1 player always beat the number two player? Will the undefeated 17-0 Miami Dolphins win 17 more in a row against the second best team? Even in a match with 1000 games between two opponents there is uncertainty as to which is better. To suggest that Deep Blue is hiding is silly, and will not coax them into more matches. The winning of a contest does not establish superiority. We only say it does because we like to fool ourselves and it makes a great ego stroker.
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.