Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:52:39 10/16/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 16, 1999 at 18:35:11, Amir Ban wrote: >On October 16, 1999 at 17:16:45, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On October 16, 1999 at 15:43:59, Amir Ban wrote: >> >>>On October 16, 1999 at 01:29:04, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On October 15, 1999 at 23:55:47, walter irvin wrote: >>>> >>>>>does anyone care to speculate what elo the deep blue that defeated kasparov was >>>>>playing at . i know it was too few games to pin down an exact elo . does anyone >>>>>believe a micro program like fritz ect could win 1 in 5 games vs db ?? if db was >>>>>on icc could it be beaten at blitz by ANY of the players there ??? i'm just >>>>>curious as to what others think about this . >>>> >>>> >>>>I would speculate, and it is _real_ speculation, that it was in the 2750-2850 >>>>range. Based on lots of things including deep thought performing at 2600 over >>>>25 games to get the Fredkin 2 prize, plus beating kasparov. Whether it is >>>>stronger than Kasparov or not is a good question. It is clearly close enough >>>>to worry about. >>>> >>> >>>You were told here only a week that this was for 2500 USCF (i.e. about ELO >>>2400), and you acknowledged this information. How did you manage to forget it so >>>fast ? >> >>the requirement was to exceed 2500 USCF. they hit right at 2600 USCF. I >>didn't acknowledge anything different. And _nothing_ I know of says that >>USCF = FIDE+100. In fact, Ken Sloan (in the CIS department) did a detailed >>study and found that above 2400 or so the ratings are far closer than that >> >>He published that in r.g.c.c about 2 years ago. It hasn't changed that I >>know of. >> >> >> >>> >>>This is not the first time that when corrected on a piece of Deep Blue >>>information, you acknowledged mistake, then immediately went back to repeating >>>it. >> >>This is not the first time you make an error in a statement, then refer to >>the original error as fact. DT had a rating of about 2600 USCF over 25 >>consecutive games. You can find the exact details in the JICCA announcement >>where they were awarded the prize. >> > >Nice try. It was in fact USCF 2551. ok... what does that change in my post you jumped in on? I was over on DT's rating by 49 points. Has little effect on my reasoning for DB's rating... > > >>You really have this 'envy' thing going, don't you? >> > >Yes. I wish I could make things up as easily as you do. It's an asset in some >situations. > >Amir I was thinking about your tremendous envy of the DB project. You have taken every chance possible to 'do them in'. from your mistaken statements about their output, to whatever. your loss, not mine...
This page took 0.02 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.