chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

Deep Blue (Computer) vs Garry Kasparov
"Tangled Up in Blue" (game of the day Oct-16-2016)
IBM Man-Machine (1997), New York, NY USA, rd 6, May-??
Caro-Kann Defense: Karpov. Modern Variation (B17)  ·  1-0
ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 66 times; par: 22 [what's this?]

explore this opening
find similar games 11 more Deep Blue/Kasparov games
sac: 9.O-O PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: If you missed a Game of the Day, you can review the last year of games at our Game of the Day Archive.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 16 OF 16 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Oct-18-16  RookFile: Kasparov underestimated Deep Blue's strength. In the end, it's a simple as that.
Oct-18-16  WorstPlayerEver: <Mendrys>

Really? So why they dismantled DB? To destroy the evidence. What else? DB team just put a psychological trick on Kasparov.

Oct-18-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  diceman: The Caro-Couldn't
Oct-18-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  Mendrys: <WorstPlayerEver: <Mendrys>

Really? So why they dismantled DB? To destroy the evidence. What else? DB team just put a psychological trick on Kasparov.>

If that were true, which it is not - One bank is at the National Museum of American History while the other bank is at another museum, it still would not prove anything. This is specious logic at its best.

It's really down to what RookFile said - "Kasparov underestimated Deep Blue's strength..."

Oct-18-16  Absentee: <Mendrys: <WorstPlayerEver: <Mendrys>

Really? So why they dismantled DB? To destroy the evidence. What else? DB team just put a psychological trick on Kasparov.>

If that were true, which it is not - One bank is at the National Museum of American History while the other bank is at another museum, it still would not prove anything. This is specious logic at its best. >

You're only saying that because you haven't seen the pictures of Joel Benjamin chained inside Deep Blue. They're a little blurred, but it's clearly him.

Jan-20-17  posoo: it is OVIUS dat kaspovar THREW da match at da behest of da IBEMERS in order to advance da cause of da compoters and corpotions. a SHAM!

now we have stuckfoil and people sniff their rubkas. a true tragedy and LASKER CRIES.

Mar-27-17  ahmadov: Is this not the game that Kasparov called a "catastrophe"?
Apr-28-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  kbob: Even in retrospect it seems to me that Kasparov was remarkably behind in what was already ancient theory at the time. Karpov discussed these moves at length in his book "The Caro-Kann in Black and White" (1994) citing Geller-Meduna, Sochi 1986 and Chandler vs Huebner, 1987 ("...Grandmaster Heubner fell into the same trap a year later, and this time the crush was more convincing.") Karpov goes on to mention the correct, or at least playable move 8. ...fxe6 "achieving excellent chances" in Wolff vs Granda Zuniga, 1992
Apr-28-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: Hi kbob,

Kasparov knew of the theory but his 7..h6 was a finger slip, (it happens to the best of them from time to time).

"Garry shook his head in disbelief."

page 109, 'Kasparov v Deep Blue' by Danny King.

This 7...h6 may have caused a quick sweat for the Deep Blue team because according to Danny King 8.Nxe6 was in the Deep Blue opening database.

So if at that stage DB was accessing it's ROM and told to sacrifice on e6 without working it out the BD team would have thought the worst:

"Why did Gary allowed it..Did he have a defensive improvement?"

The answer was no and judging from Kasparov's reaction the DB team would have breathed a quick sigh of relief. Gary simply got the move order mixed up.

Jun-04-17  Xonatron: In Garry's new book, Deep Thinking, he explains 7... h6 was a planned attacked, not a mistake, knowing that Deep Blue would not play 8. Nxe6 and retreat the knight instead. Other chess engines at the time were known not to play it, due to material disadvantage. Apparently he discovered afterwards that Deep Blue would also have not played it, had it not been for the opening book. There was a story coming from Deep Blue's team that this opening was entered into the database the morning of the game. As well, there was a story from Deep Blue's side that contradicting this.

Read the book!

Also read Behind Deep Blue, by Feng-Hsiung Hsu (the lead coder of Deep Blue).

Deep Blue's only positional advantage in the match came from a GM's entry in an opening book.

A rematch was deserved by both the chess world and computer chess world.

Jun-04-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: Hi Xonatron,

I'm only repeating was Danny King said.

"Garry shook his head in disbelief." and later on "...he was distraught".

I'm pretty sure he was not trying to out-psyche a computer by gestures.

In a review of the 'Deep Thinking' by Garry Kasparov:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...

We read.

"Because the company was sponsoring the rematch (and putting up the $1.1m prize money), its staff were able to structure the venue in subtle ways, some of which had the effect of discomfiting Kasparov.

(In contrast to standard tournament practice, for example, IBM did not provide a private “team room” where he could consult with his seconds.)"

I've no idea what that bit in brackets relates too. Maybe the reviewer thinks players are allowed to consult with their seconds during a game or he has misread what Kasparov was saying...

...and anyway according again to Danny King ' Kasparov v Deeper Blue' on page 53 he says:

"Kasparov has his own room to which he can retreat if he wants to get a drink or something to eat."

Jun-04-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  MissScarlett: <In Garry's new book, Deep Thinking, he explains 7... h6 was a planned attacked, not a mistake, knowing that Deep Blue would not play 8. Nxe6 and retreat the knight instead. Other chess engines at the time were known not to play it, due to material disadvantage. Apparently he discovered afterwards that Deep Blue would also have not played it, had it not been for the opening book.>

Was Kasparov unaware that Deep Blue had an openings' book?

Jun-04-17  john barleycorn: <Was Kasparov unaware that Deep Blue had an openings' book?>

Vladimirov's revenge

Jul-21-17  Albion 1959: Can't imagine why GK played the Caro Kann in the deciding game? He played a shocker, it was if he decided to play it on the spur of the moment and then tried to improvise and muddle his way through over the board. It is a tribute to Deep Blue's tactical prowess and opening knowledge that GK did not have the confidence to play his customary Sicilian Defence ! An opening with which his thoroughly familiar and has scored many fine wins with, but somehow he was not prepared to risk it against the IMB monster calculator, which in effect is all that Deep Blue really is:
Jul-27-17  WorstPlayerEver: <Was Kasparov unaware that Deep Blue had an openings' book?>

<MissScarlett>

Let's take a look in retrospective; the surrounding facts.

First, it's 1997. PC is all the rage. I bought a PC in 1994. A 486dx2. The whole package. Which contained an encyclopaedia, another cd which I don't remember and last but not least: Alone in the Dark.. a very creepy game. Which consisted of the same polygon stuff as it basically still is the same as it is today.

This package costed me 3150 Dutch florins. About $1250 in 1994. Which was a two month's salary for me.

Needless to say it's a SYMBOLIC event: man loses to ehm.. you get the point.

Needless to say it was about as good as it gets: no better ad needed to promote *bubble fx* THE FUTURE. The illusion we had to live in an illusion. Unevitable. To seperate our focus from our environment. Being controlled by a fantom. A meaningless reflection of what you once thought you were. So to speak.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What is this future? As it was seen back then in 1997?

This *projected* future from then is now.

And what do you know? Kasparov was selling Kasparov chess computers all over the place. In other words: computers are the bomb. If he had won no one would have been interested. As most people are not interested in chess in the first place.

Although their strength was -and is- pretty average.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Is it deception? Or another conspiracy theory..

Well, de facto it is the symbolic submission to machinery...

However, Kaspy played so lousy it hardly was meant as a smokescreen, a masquerade. It was meant as a message to mankind: the gamer was born in submission!

Born to lose ha ha ha it's complete lunacy. If you think about it. The possession of the soul. Defeatism. As defined as the *new* intellectual norm. A standard. Something set to live up to. Buy more and more Pink Floyd records lol

It was an exposure as well, a declaration: the sacrifice of human intelligence was fulfilled. A symbolic event to clarify we -the human existence as we know it- are no longer the masters of our own destiny. Instead we have become nothing more ore less than matter to serve other more important matters. The purpose of this concept remains unquestioned, however. You are free to follow the orders to which you have to obey.

Let there be no doubt about; I address things exactly as I see they are. And I am convinced you cannot find a way around them.

Otherwise I would not even write this; I am sick of your sentimental crap. Your pettiness.

It was -so called- the sacrifice of the soul. Hahaha genius. Gotta love those concepts.

So let's work this out. yOur souls are kept at teh net. Strictly spoken it's categorical; the mind is separated from the body. It's literally buried in a book. A shrine. Cell phones and tabs are your new bibles AKA altars whateverness.

You carry them with you most of the time by now. You MUST obey to them. Given fact in particular. And download eh you know by now..

Again: a symbolic ritual. You are no longer the master of our own destiny. Now you must believe the machines control you. And they do. Ironically enough. And buy Pink Floyd records, obviously.

Let there be no doubt about; I address things exactly as I see they are. And I am convinced you cannot find a way around them. Unless you buy me a new swimming oool. We can freely negotiate here 😊

Otherwise I would not even write this; I am sick of your sentimental crap. Your pettiness. You must obey.

It was -so called- the sacrifice of the soul. Hahaha genius. Gotta love those concepts.

So let's work this out. yOur souls are kept at teh net. Strictly spoken it's categorical; the mind is separated from the body. Again: a symbolic ritual.

Being the WPE in this story I kinda thought it would be interesting letting you know.

Jul-27-17  WorstPlayerEver: <MissScarlett>

I forgot something. Only the first part of my previous post is supposed to be addressed to you lol

Jul-27-17  WorstPlayerEver: PS my edits are not my best today but I still kinda like it ☺
Dec-29-17  yurikvelo: https://pastebin.com/K2qzrRt6 <---- multiPV
Jan-21-18  Granny O Doul: I remember that Joel Benjamin at the time discounted the notion that 7...h6 was a "fingerfehler", adding that the move had fared well in recent editions of Computer Chess Reports.
Jan-21-18
Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <Granny> K talks about that very move in the youtube video I posted over on his page.
Jan-21-18  RookFile: It was a gamble on Kasparov's part, and a bad one.
Jan-23-18
Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <RookFile> my take on his video is that only after 8.Nxe6 did Kasparov realize it was a gamble. Before that he thought it a sure thing.

Am I correct in assuming that the Deep-Blue team had only added that variation into the opening book on the very morning of the game?

Mar-17-19  Albion 1959: Had another look at this one. Gave it the Rybka treatment. GK was a bit naïve to believe that DB would not play the sacrifice on e6, or maybe he simply under estimated DB? Kasparov's play was unrecognisable here. Sometimes, the best attacking players are not necessarily the best defenders. Attack-mined world champions do not go on the defensive as early as move 10. Did Kasparov have to play h6? Surely there were better moves than this? How about the modest Be7!? Another idea, instead of e6, was g6-Bg7 followed by O-O. This looks okay. Was Kasparov's really lost from as early move ten? He never got his rematch, where I suspect he could have won, allowing for a change in his attitude, tactics and mind set.
May-02-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  Diademas: Hannah Fry, a British mathematician (maybe best known from the Numberphile channel on YouTube) has written a book. The book "Hello World" concerns the influence of algorithms in the real world. In a chapter of her book she gets into the 1997 match Kasparov against Deep Blue.

Here she talks about it an interview
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yec...

And here is an excerpt from the chapter. https://www.sciencefriday.com/artic...

Quite interesting stuff!

May-02-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  Diademas: BTW
Maybe this match deserves a page of its own?

With the possible exception of Spassky - Fischer World Championship Match (1972) it may be the best known chess match in history.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 16)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 16 OF 16 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a Moderator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.
Spot an error? Please submit a correction slip and help us eliminate database mistakes!
<This page contains Editor Notes. Click here to read them.>
This game is type: CLASSICAL (Disagree? Please submit a correction slip.)

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
meysam's favorite games
by meysam
A great game by a computer programme
from Masterpieces of chess history by ahmadov
wild games 1
by wwm
Tangled Up in Blue
from My Favorite Games by gabriel112000
Karpov Variation. Modern Main Line
from MKD's Caro Kann by MKD
Deep Blue (doesn't live)
from PLayer of the day:notable game II by nikolaas
zengames
by zentovic
October 16: Tangled Up in Blue
from Game of the Day 2016 by Phony Benoni
7...h6?! forces 8. Nxe6!, & wins after 8...Qe7 (8...fxe6!? = )
from Demolition of Pawns: f6 (f3), e6 (e3), a7 (a2) by patzer2
September 12: Tangled Up in Blue
from Game of the Day 2005 by Phony Benoni
zumakal blunders archivadas1
by zumakal
Caro-Kann Def. Karpov
from RPaterno1's favorite games by RPaterno1
7...h6?! forces 8. Nxe6!, & wins after 8...Qe7 (8...fxe6!? = )
from Demolition of Pawns: f6 (f3), e6 (e3), a7 (a2) by Del ToRo
Kasparov vs Deep Blue
by piatos blue
Kasparov vs Deep Blue
by paire
Man vs. Machine
by neverfallen
Learn from the Masters-Opening (Caro-Kann)
by vsadek
A popularized knight scrifice beats world champion
from The art of sacrifice by neverfallen
Kasparov Suffers Historic Loss vs. Computer
from Most Interesting Games by Francis P Monaco
The most phoney game of chess I've ever seen
from PinkPanther's favorite games by PinkPanther
plus 93 more collections (not shown)


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC