Author: blass uri
Date: 12:08:07 01/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 11, 2000 at 12:59:33, Graham Laight wrote: >On January 10, 2000 at 21:34:40, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>>I see what you are saying... >>>> >>>I did find this on the rebel site though... >>> >>>"Deep Blue - Kasparov the re-match of 1997 won by Deep Blue. >>> >>>In this famous position Gary Kasparov resigned while he could have a draw with >>>Qe3! Like Gary for most computers this move is also very hard to find. >>>Rebel 10.0 (normal) Qe3! not found after 13 plies and 30 minutes. >>>Rebel 10.0 (anti-GM) Qe3 found at ply 12 at 7:22" >>> >>>looks like the anti-GM feature did find the move if I'm reading this right... >>>> >> >>Aha.. now I understand. Crafty (at the time) found Qe3 easily. But it thought >>it was losing. It never understood that the score was anywhere near 0.00. That >>was the issue I was addressing. It is one thing to find the right move, another >>to find the right move for the right reason. Kasparov said that the draw was >>obvious after he looked at it and couldn't believe the computer had overlooked >>it. He was wrong. The draw is over 60 plies into the future, not "a few". > >So how is it possible that within hours of the game, people from all over the >world had found the draw with their PC based chess programs? > >-g I found the draw by giving Genius3 to play against itself after the interesting Qe3 and trying to improve the line for deeper blue with no success. I saw an evaluation of draw after many plies in the relevant lines and I found no improvement for deeper blue by trying next best. I think that the draw is obvious for a team of human+microcomputer+some hours. I was disappointed from deeper blue because I expected deeper blue before the match to find everything that human(with elo less than 2000)+micro+some hours can find about tactics. 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.