Author: blass uri
Date: 01:13:42 10/17/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 16, 1999 at 22:52:39, Robert Hyatt wrote: >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... I think that today humans are better in playing against computers so in order to learn about deep thought's ability I prefer to look at games against computers. I found that Deep thought lost against mephisto in 1989 and I quess that cray blitz (without bugs) has a good chance to beat mephisto of 1989 100:0(I understood that it had 100% score against Genius1 and Genius1 had chances only when Cray blitz was significantly slowed down). I also doubt if top programs are going to lose 1 game out of 100 against mephisto of 1989. I know also that deep thought lost to Fritz3(p90) and drew with wchess(p90). of course deep thought won most of the games against computers but based on the games that I saw I was not impressed by deep thought's ability. I see stupid mistakes of deep thought against mephisto in the game that it lost. Deep thought against mephisto let mephisto to trade to a simple won pawn endgame. I tried some commercial programs and they play better. They see a big drop in the evaluation after deep thought's last mistake. Uri
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.