Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 03:58:28 01/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 11, 2000 at 05:25:49, Amir Ban wrote:
>On January 11, 2000 at 01:10:56, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>Worst of all, I think he considered Deep Blue to be a micro program with a big
>>box around it. He really had no comprehension of how much better 200 Million
>>NPS is than 200 Thousand NPS. Statments about how {paraphrasing} "computers
>>will never make a move like that" indicate to me that he prepared by playing
>>against micros. That is like preparing for Linares by running through a bunch
>>of games with C club players. Deep Blue will see things that other computers
>>simply will not see without allowing absurd time intervals. If he allowed the
>>micros to think for one week per move he might get something commensurate. But
>>then, the playing experience would not be the same, because he would be
>>operating at a slow, postal rate and have plenty of time to think through the
>>possibilities.
>>
>
>This has been said countless times before, and the follow up question: Show us
>one move that Deep Blue (or Deep Thought) made that a micro needs a week to
>find, has never been answered.
>
>Amir
I pointed out one in the first match, in the game DB won, where Kasparov had a
mate in 1 for about 10 moves. A subtle rook move made the entire variation
work, where the rook move preferred by the micros at the time would have
resulted in deep trouble. I don't recall the game now, but I remember that
DB was white (again, in match 1 which it lost) and its king was hemmed in on
the kingside with Kasparov threatening mate. But he never got to play the
mate...
Other examples are the Nolot positions. Micros get 1-2-3 maybe. Deep Thought
did better. And that wasn't deep blue.
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.