< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
|May-16-09|| ||Dionyseus: <AnalyseThis> <Is today's Rybka stronger than yesterday's Deeper Blue, which was so big (physically) and took down Kasparov? I guess we'll never really know. >
I am certain Rybka and the other top engines of today are much stronger than Deep Blue. I estimate Deep Blue was around 2600 elo, but with Kasparov's psychological weakness in that match to him it seemed Deep Blue was closer to 2800, whereas Kasparov played perhaps at a little below 2600, his performance was quite terrible in that match.|
In comparison it is believed by many that Rybka 3 on strong hardware performs at around 3200. Top competitors such as Naum 4 and Deep Fritz 11 are easily at 3000 with top hardware.
|May-16-09|| ||Dionyseus: <Dionyseus> < If i'm interpreting the logfile correctly then according to the logfile Deep Blue searched to a brute-force depth of 8 with extensions to depth 19 and took 173 seconds to make its 38th move. >|
I was incorrect. For its 38th move Deep Blue searched to a brute-force depth of 12, not counting search extensions. This is indicated by the "12(6)" in the log file.
Here's the full definition of "12(6)" from Deep Blue's programmer:
12(6) means 12 plies of brute force (not
counting the search extensions & quiescence).
6 means the maximum hardware search depth
allowed. This means that the PV could be up to 6 plies
deeper before quiescence.
|May-17-09|| ||whatthefat: <Dionyseus>
That's really interesting, thanks! Sounds like it was seeing about as far as Fritz on my old laptop then - which is still perfectly good enough to beat me. :)
|Jul-01-09|| ||Check It Out: I really enjoyed this game. Kasparov was such a flexible player. Switching from his usual attacking style to this positional game is amazing, particularly under the "metal pressure" of the event.|
A visually interesting game. After black's 14th move, all Kasparov's pawns and pieces are on the first three ranks and all blacks pieces are on the 5th-8th ranks and there is this great divide on the 4th rank with nothing; you can practically feel the tension of the two armies about to clash.
And then, as has been commented, 39.g4 followed by a bunch of trades on the same, and the computer finally realizes, "uh oh, I'm screwed."
|Jul-04-09|| ||Check It Out: Deep Blue's 28...f4, 29...e5 plan falls prey to Kasparov's incredible exchange sacrifice 30.f4! The computer must not be able to see the power of the connected passed f and g passed pawns due to the horizon effect; 31.Ne5 blocks the a1-h8 diagonal but allows 31...g6, securing the powerfully potent and perfectly preening pumped-up passed pawn duo. (sorry for the bad alliteration riff there)|
|Sep-30-09|| ||kasparvez: How about the G.O.T.D title: "Beaten Black and Blue"?|
|Apr-18-10|| ||JonathanJ: i'd prefer kasparvez gotd title ;)|
|Apr-18-10|| ||atakantmac: excellent game by kasparov|
|Apr-18-10|| ||JASAHA: I think that the advantage that a computer has over a human is that it is unemotional and can calculate quicker. One can be psyched out over playing a computer, but the reverse is not true. In this sense, a computer is playing a different game. In the end one can say that since humans created the computers, the latter are really just toys or tools, not chess players of the human variety.|
|Apr-18-10|| ||playground player: <Whatthefat,> <Random Visitor> Hey, guys, you know about things like this: How good was Deep Blue in 1997, compared to today's best chess computers?|
|Apr-18-10|| ||Bobwhoosta: <Check it out>
I liked the alliteration, but if you happen to see this, why did you choose "duo" over say "pair"?
|Apr-18-10|| ||nimh: <<Whatthefat,> <Random Visitor> Hey, guys, you know about things like this: How good was Deep Blue in 1997, compared to today's best chess computers?>|
DB of 1997 was a trifle over 2800, Rybka on a duo-core is believed to be far above 3000.
Nevertheless, in actual play a comp would perform worse; humans have intelligence to drive the play into strategical positions where the difficulty is far lower and reliance on tactics primarily is not so productive.
|Apr-18-10|| ||Travis Bickle: <JASAHA> Also computers never get fatigued and have no fear and can defend outrageously to a humans way of thinking.|
|Apr-18-10|| ||chrisowen: <Playground player> Garry thinks swhim in the knight 13.Nh4 provoking g5. In the machine head grasp the concept of mind the king is not high. School is extended body of pawns open a new clear path arming Garry's pieces. How now chess engines go deeper for king protection, kinda imitates our life. 11.Qe1 plan is to get her Deep Blue out of book. Aspire advantage 39..Kh6 throws it away wrestling with h4. After the renegade rook takes g4, white's setting free the bears. Treat I see the pawns as passions of the soul, even exchanging the rook doesn't ryle him.|
|Apr-19-10|| ||Check It Out: This is a graceful game with a surprising gambit (28...f5), a great comeback exchange sac (30.f4), and an exciting denouement on the g4 square starting on move 40... After 44.f6 it's all over. Good stuff! Looking forward to reading the learned comments.|
|Apr-20-10|| ||kevin86: Does a machine resign? Or does it blow a gasket? lol|
|May-12-10|| ||SirChrislov: I like my pun a lot more. Appetite for Deepstruction.|
|Jan-02-11|| ||David2009: Game 1 of 1997 match: Did Deep Blue miss a draw on move 43 (two moves before resignation)? This is the position |
click for larger view
(Kasparov vs Deep Blue 1997 G1, 43...?). Crafty End Game trainer finds 43..Kh5 which appears to force exchanges and a blockade, and it then very difficult to win this ending for White if it can be won at all. After 44.Rg3 there comes Rd5 45.f6 Rf5+ 46.Ke2 Rg8 47.g7 Rf3 48.Rxf3 exf3+ 49.Kxf3 Kg6 50.Ke4 Kf7 to reach
click for larger view
and neither side can make progress. Link:
Of course, these White moves although reasonable may npot be the best. If you can win this position playing White against Crafty EGT, please post your solution. Open the link and drag and drop the move you want to make
According to the documentary film "Game over: Kasparov and the machine" Deep Blue played 'like a patzer' in this game. Some patzer!
If there was indeed a draw, this illustrates the amazing progress in computer skill and evaluation technique since 1997. Crafty EGT finds the drawing line/ blockade in 10 seconds.
|Jan-02-11|| ||OhioChessFan: I just beat it and it didn't seem that hard. 44. Rg1 might be better than the suggested line. Anyway, my game went 44. Rg3 Rd5 45. f6 Rf5+ 46. Ke2 Rg8 47. g7 Rf3 48. <Be5> Rxg3 (This can't be best) 49. f7 R3xg7 50. Bxg7 Ra8 51. f8Q Rxf8 52. Bxf8 Kg4 53. Ke3 Kf5 54. Bg7 Ke6 55. Kxe4 Kd6 56. Bf8+ Kc7 57. Kd4 Kb6 58. c4 (the winning move for White in a whole bunch of lines) bxc4 59. Kxc4 Kb7 60. Kc5 Kc7 61. Bd6+ Kd7 62. Bh2 Ke6 63. Bc7 Kd7 64. Bb6 Ke7 65. Kxc6 1-0|
|Jan-02-11|| ||OhioChessFan: I tossed this in Fritz and at lower plies, he slightly prefers 48...Kh6 to Rxg3. That seems more in line with the intended blockade.|
|Jan-02-11|| ||OhioChessFan: 44. Rg3 Rd5 45. f6 Rf5+ 46. Ke2 Rg8 47. g7 Rf3 48. <Be5> <Kh6> 49. Rg1 Kh5 50. Kd2 Rd8+ 51. Kc1 and I sure wouldn't want to be Black.
click for larger view
|Feb-23-12|| ||Everett: If I remember correctly, I think Kasparov was very critical of his 24.f3, preferring 24.Nxg4 Bxg4 25.Ne3 where he felt he had a clear plus. Does anyone have a computer evaluation handy? Thanks in advance.|
|Apr-11-12|| ||kontoleon: exchange sacrifice to push the pawn ouaou!|
|Oct-09-12|| ||sagahelten: "Deep Blue's 44th move in this game puzzled Kasparov, and he attributed it to "superior intelligence". In fact, the move was a result of a bug in which Deep Blue, unable to determine a desirable move, resorted to a fail-safe. Nate Silver proposes that Kasparov experienced anxiety over this particular move, which led him to lose the second game." [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...|
|Oct-09-12|| ||diceman: <SirChrislov: I like my pun a lot more. |
Appetite for Deepstruction.>
Appebyte for Deepstruction.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·