Socrates (Computer) vs Deep Blue (Computer) (1994)

Socrates (Computer) vs Deep Blue (Computer)
Cape May,NJ ACM 1994 · Sicilian Defense: Richter-Rauzer. Neo-Modern Variation Early deviations (B66) · 0-1

explore this opening	find similar games	1 more Socrates/Deep Blue game
sac: 37...a3	PGN: download \| view	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: If your system is incapable of running Java (e.g. some mobile devices), you should pick the Java viewer "None (text only)" from the pulldown below. If you need to install Java, visit www.java.com.

For help with the default chess viewer, please see the Chess Viewer Deluxe Quickstart Guide.

May-23-08		rwbean: In April 1995 Robert Hyatt wrote in rec.games.chess: "The last time deep thought and star socrates played [referring to this game], deep thought found a forcing line to win material, and it saw the win at least 5 full moves before star socrates knew it had fallen into the sewer." Remembering this, I decided to go over this game with Rybka. What surprises me is how bad the play is. Rybka is much better than either computer, finding some big improvements: 18. Ne2 (as in Dolmatov - Greenfeld 1991) will draw after 18. Ne2 Bb6 19. Bxh6 20. Bc4? is a horrible move: the improvement for Black is 22... b4 23. axb4 Bd5 24. Rxd5 axb4 25. Bc4 Nxd5 26. Qxe7 Nxe7 (+1.09). Instead White can improve on the game line with 27. Bc4 Rb8+ 28. Kc1 (-0.26). Similarly, 29. Rxc6 and 31 ... a4 are bad moves and 33. Ke2?? is a losing blunder. I don't really see where the forcing line was but it did open my eyes to how much better current software running on the average computer today is compared with the best programs of 1994.

Jan-25-09		rwbean: Actually Feng-Hsiung Hsu already noted 22... b4 was better than 22... Qe3+ in 1994: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.... "Newborn refered to the win over StarSocrates as one of the most brilliant games in computer chess history, but it would have been a much better game had it played b4 first before playing Qe3+, as then white would not have the chance to trade the queens."

Jan-25-09		rwbean: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.... Feng-Hsiung Hsu in July 1994: "*Socrates thought it was winning the d4 pawn by playing Na2, while DT2 knew all along that the d4 pawn was untouchable. It is not a matter of chess knowledge. It is a matter of calculating the dynamics of the position. It was expecting Ne2, by the way, and calculated that even after Ne2 it had a bind in the position."

heart failure community and support group

NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, 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:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
No personal attacks against other users.
Nothing in violation of United States law.

See something which violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

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, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.

Spot an error? Please submit a correction slip and help us eliminate database mistakes!
This game is type: CLASSICAL (Disagree? Please submit a correction slip.)