Kasparov's 7.... h6 is by no means an error, it just leads to a defensive position for black where the game is equal, the error came on move 11 where 11...Nh7 keeps the game equal but, b5 was played and becomes a target and now white has a better position.
if he is so great Why retire get the title back for Russia, Garry know he cant, players are to good now, back when he was champion there was no one the Russians new this, and held on to it, Bobby Fischer once said you cant live life till you are champion Fischer was one man, Garry Had a whole chess team behind him, It was like when Fischer left he kind of said here i showed you how its done go ahead and figure it out there are tons of lines to be discover i am tired here you go, he was theBEST
and to go down as the greatest player, of chess, Garry did not figure this out on his own, like Fischer did, It was a team of analyzers that kept studying and ob severing, like in the past, and made Garry who he is, Garry is a Clear fake, Its odd that He Kept facing Karpov, Since Fischer left, there was no one like Fischer who can give them a challenge, anyway Garry in game six had no clue what was going on, it funny shows how he was a fake, anyway he retired what why whats he scared of.
E4 push it was like Fischer was there, Kasparov can use any excuses he wants he can hide behind his lies, see the Russians where so embarrass by Fischer, the Fischer show that the Russians had it all wrong., he was the founder of this new chess, why he left we will never know, by doing so doing so it was the chance to ruin Fischer, Garry Was a fake, he was the new man by Russian to lead the new ideas of chess founded by Fischer, and allowed he to keep being champion to exceed Booby ratting
@xismxist you seriously underestimate the power of computing. by 2050, there will be computers that have the processing power of every single human brain on earth combine, in the size of a LAPTOP
@YamSakerII Programs with an elo-rating at 2050 stand no chance in hell against a good chess player, in fact even the strongest chessmaster or fritz programs doesnt stand a chance against the worlds best players - sure it could be a draw the first 2 games but over a series, then the player will learn how the program plays and later crush it. The given elorating is wroong too, because i usually defeat chessmaster at 1800 elo, but i have harder time defeating a friend who compete and he has 1700
Since however our brain has come into this world through a process of evolution, why isnt it possible for an electronic brain to do so also? Not through genetical evolution obviously, but through memelogical evolution.
The more number of possible moves, the less the "brute force" technique employed by computers works... In a game like GO, with more possibilities than chess, computers can not yet beat the best players. I would like to think we can just keep making more and more complex games (with more possible moves that is) as computers get better and better and always be a step ahead... until they take over, of course.
Just remember, the fact we can still beat computers at chess shows the incredible depth of chess. Why doesn't anybody talk about that....and why shouldn't a computer that is powerful enough be able to beat us. After all, there are a finite number of possible moves and combinations of moves.
I guess I'm a bit new to the game, because I can't see the loss. Could someone explain to me how it would have ended, or why it was a loss (and which color was Gary?)?? Thanks!
Kasparov was black in this game. For us mortal guys this will only be seen as an advantage for white. but at such a high level its only a matter of technice before Deep blue wins because of his queen. also it must be mention that psycology Kasparov was destroyed. its a movie made based on this match also and why Kasparov was psycology destroyed.
@sebastianquilt Gary was black. The reason he resigned was because in the final position he was down the exchange and a pawn (two minor pieces for a queen), and was about to lose another pawn when the computer played c4! Once the knight moves, the Queen will take on f5. Besides for the material deficit Kasparov was facing, his pieces were uncoordinated, his king is stuck in the center and unable to castle, and he has no visible counterplay. Hope this helps!
kasparov was sandbagged for sure by a company that had to win nomatterwhat.
as a 2000 rated player u can tell its a mix of human and computer play .
if uv ever analyzed chess with computers and are decently strong player ul see this .
a dirty move but the best move for ibm in terms of generating sales.
on the flip side it shows that if a gm knows nothing of his opponent and knows nothing of his or her or its preparation /favored lines/style, then even the best can be toppled
Problem is you couldn't see several moves because they were in phantom. It would have been better if someone's hand had simply visibly moved the pieces. It was too hard to follow the way they did it. Good music though. If someone knows what piece that music is I'd like to know.
That's a nice set, but I might prefer such a formal feeling one to not have the notation guide. Since, if you're good enough at chess to buy yourself such a set, then you're already probably good enough to know the notation at a glance.
the carrshow, game didnt continue cos kasparov resigned, why no just the stupids dumbs shut up and dont talk about things they dont know?? Tc1 and the Queen will mate black king soon
@surfermx pardon me for not knowing everything about chess. I may not have known, or maybe just forgotten the fact that this game was resigned. Now I really never knew, but it would be nice if the video said something like "Kasparov resigns" not just that deep blue won. Also I hope you are not american because if you are you have worse grammar than a 4 year old
I am sorry to point this out, but it seems you are a liar yourself, as no official verification was conducted, and all that our opinions are based on is speculation. However, majority of sources claim that Kasparov's IQ was between 185 and 190, with only 1 (one) reporting it as being 135.
Come on, man. You're just contradicting yourself all over the place. First you say there is no official verification. (There has been--read his books) Then you say one source gives it as 135, which is my actual claim. And then you say a "majority of sources" give it as between 185 and 190. And you don't tell me what these sources are. Kasparov himself said that his IQ was 135. Don't just fall for typical internet exaggeration and trash.
The first time Kasparov met deep blue he won but IBM went back to the drawing board and came back to beat Kasparov with their next computer. kasparov did not lose ever game in either of those runs. But deepblue proved to have a superior winning record when all was said and done.
i want the deep blue computer to explain. since deep blue gets 200 million moves every second, why did he take e6? aiya i think deep blue somehow cheated, i dunno how. And why wont the pawn directly take that knight, its not bad. Opens for the rook when castled king's side.
Kasparov knew about the hitting on e6 guys.... He just didn't realize a computer would play it. A normal computer would play Ne4 instead of hitting on e6. But it was programmed before the game to hit on e6 since they believed kasparov was a bad defender (compared to is amazingly attacking style)
Still the hitting on e6 is really an interesting move!! Still I admire the way Deep Blue finished the game. kasparov was completly chanseless here. Well done!!
This is the first step to the "terminator salvation". Scary. Really really scary fact that a Machine can beat a Man like that. And what are we heading into? The 6th Generation Jets will be Unmanned!
lol I don't think the terminators had GM Joel Benjamin (who worked for IBM) helping them by watching for any mistakes Deep Blue made and over riding the move.
This is why IBM refused to show Kasparov the Deep Blue logs (because it would have shown human interference), refused a re-match and dismantled Deep Blue straight after. In short Kasparov was cheated. Deep Blue with any minor GM (let alone Joel Benjamin) is invincible.
@Mettachetta it's impossble for a computer or robot to take over unless we make a learning computer. Even At that there isn't much of a risk. Think, If we only programed something to do one thing, It CAN'T do something else because it can't learn, and dosen't know how.
@michaelhays92 Dude are you kidding me!? After 1. c4 bxc4 2. Qxc4 Nb4 (which is what would have been played, as you say correctly) the position is absolutely crushing for white. In fact, my engine evaluates it as a +4.2. Kasparov has no chance. You need to brush up on how to evaluate positions correctly.
@DancingWasabi Lol, fuck you. My engine evaluates it as +0.30. Get a better engine bitch, don't make yourself look like an idiot when dealing with the pros, kid. You need to brush up on how to evaluate positions correctly, fucker.
@michaelhays92 If you actually evaluate the position correctly after Nb4 (which for some reason you had to assign an exclamation mark to because you're an idiot) it becomes clear that white wins AT LEAST two pieces for a rook in an open position where black's done. "Semi-equal position" my ass. Oh but of course, we should listen to this so-called "pro" michaelhays92! Let this idiot lead us to believe the position is equal while Kasparov himself, the real pro, resigned it. Gtfo kid.
@DancingWasabi Bahahahahaha, you are honestly too stupid to argue with. Learn how to play the game, and then we'll talk. You are honestly so pathetic. And if you've really been playing chess longer than I've been on this earth, then you are a very immature geezer. Play me if you really think you're such a pro, you waste of space. Get a life and stop trying to defend yourself when you are CLEARLY wrong. Gtfo old man.
@michaelhays92 Once again you yell like a child instead of arguing properly. See in order to make a point, you need evidence. I have provided mine; now where is the evidence supporting your idiotic claim that the position is equal?? Calling me names does not prove anything, except that you are immature. So tell me, oh wise one, how exactly am I, and therefore Kasparov himself, "CLEARLY wrong"?
@DancingWasabi Hahaha. I love how you wasted your time with this. Get a life fag, and I mean fag not in the gay way, but the much more offensive way (worthless loser)
@michaelhays92 And I can show you all of the lines, EVERY SINGLE ONE, where black is destroyed after Nb4 (through substantial material gain and a crushing position). But of course someone like you wouldn't care to look at actual facts, but instead try to insult someone who's probably been playing chess longer than you've been on this earth. But please, continue to hide behind the Internet's veil of anonymity and keep whining. You can really accomplish a lot that way.
i dont understand why ppl say deep blue cheated, i mean it's a computer and it learns from mistakes, but kasparov had to be a sore loser, not wanting to accept defeat. but even IF IBM cheated, kasparov still should have been able to defeat deep blue because i dont think the a few IBM geeks who are controlling deep blue from another room could still beat kasparov.
people are saying deep blue cheated because of THAT purpose that you mentioned. That Deep Blue was not necessarily controlled, but had an advantage; claiming that Deep Blue was allowed to preview Kasparov's earlier tournament games.
Anyone who thinks deep blue cheated is on the same intellectual level as the people who think Bush orchestrated 9/11. There is ZERO evidence that any cheating was involved. Previewing your opponent's previous games about as far from cheating as you can get.
While I'm not entirely convinced that Deep Blue cheated, there is definitely evidence that they did. One, circumstantial evidence--deep blue never competed again after that match. Why the freak not? What gives?? Second, the IBM team made no effort to make their moves transparent. The Deep Blue machine was nowhere to be found.
If there was cheating (I'm not saying that it was, I woudn't know because I haven't really looked in to the issue) there is no need for the cheating player to be better than Kasparov.
Kasparov knew very well of the materialistic favoring of computers back then and was looking to trap the computer with better strategy. He could very well know what the best move was but simply not be expecting the computer to find it because of the inherit weakness of it to evaluate strategic positions.
its a machine with all the moves from previous grand masters just a machine analizing 200 million movs a sec. makes no mistakes then losses the 1st game takes kasparovs movs and then magically wins by memorizing kasparovs movs thats cheating Kasparov is still the best ever.,....
lol Deep blue did not cheat. Gary kasparov was trained by the Russians who had computers to figure out a way to counter Bobby Fischer game style, chess computers where quite advance. Any ways thats not important. Cause Russians are need to hide there shame in how they thought chess, so all in all Gary Kasparov when u lost this game and at that moment did you feel like that Bobby Fischer was on the other end,
Only Fischer would of seen that move, he knew when to strike. it was Kasparov vs Fischer
You're incorrect actually; Deep Blue does NOT learn from mistakes. All it does is analyze the current board state and make an optimal move based on that, at least until the end game, although it cannot look at EVERY strategy; I believe to beat Kasparov it was looking at the possibilities for 11 moves ahead. At the end game, it switches strategies and just analyzes every possible move and choose the best.
Not to mention, Kasparov BLUNDERED with a6. Did Deep Blue make him blunder? I mean the idea that because a a computer beat a human it must mean the computer cheated is absurd on its face.
Deep blue used brute force to win. It could process millions of moves per second. No mind, no matter how intelligent, can process at a level equal to it. Unless of course you remove all other functions of the mind and focus it completely around chess.
That's definitely not true, because Kasparov smashed deep blue in game one. Brute force alone didn't help Deep Blue in that game--the only way it could ave won game two was by learning from past mistakes.
Third, Deep Blue's style of play was radically different in game two from its play in game 1. It declined Kasparov's pawn sac, selecting an intangible positional advantage over taking material. That is quite unbecoming of a "machine" that analyzed its positions only by "brute force."
Yes, Deep Blue and its programers made adjustments. What is so u nusual about that? Deep Blue's improved play is perfectly consistent with progress and innovation.
Exactly. The computer's programming was modified between matches in much the same way someone changes their playstyle after recognizing a mistake they made. So while the computer itself wasn't changing its play, it still can be very different from one game to another.
@got2hurt yep its been told that there were some cellphone hookers and that they were snorting,fuck,even shooting electricity.I bet it was a night full of lols and lmaos.
its game 6, hes probably beat up and mooshy inside, getting hotheaded and jitty to win, and all this underneath being a world champ and having a lot of focus on you and stuff, lots of things BESIDES the actual game to bear on your shoulders.
From what I've heard, you can buy chess software very inexpensively or even download it from some sites free like Winboard. Anyway, a lot of this average software nowadays is just as good if not a little better than deep blue.
I wonder how long it will be before we can all buy a chess computer with the same power as Deep Blue (or more) and the same book moves, after all, it has been over 10 years.
Looks like you haven't played/watched professional chess at all buddy, Kasparov resigned (surrendered), knowing all hope for a decisive victory was lost after his little a6 blunder. After white's 19th move, he 0-1'd.
this video sucks, I want grandmaster evaluation of all the pitfalls and alternative book lines that are slightly better, as well as the point before Kaspy loses the init where the game should have gone and what the result position might have looked like draws wins at least 5
and where deepblue actually started thinking, from what i heard deep never even got out of j databas play stored (grandmaster move) move... i think they shouldv given kaspy a takeback . Deepblue w/oopenbok+data=1900elo ha!
holy shit, this song is amazing!!!
TheDayIsNotLost 4 weeks ago
What is the song's title?? It's amazing and I would like to have it on my iPod or something :)
TheDayIsNotLost 1 month ago
fake, the game can be finish it in two simple moves
1221dav 1 month ago
schach-brett.de
Schachbenno 3 months ago
Comment removed
dublynflya 5 months ago
Comment removed
dublynflya 5 months ago
Comment removed
dublynflya 5 months ago
I don't understand the final move.........
EliZultch 6 months ago
@EliZultch kasparov made a bad move, realised that he wouldn't be able to win, so gave up.
nh3000 5 months ago
Well, that was meaningless.
cosg9531 7 months ago
Kasparov's 7.... h6 is by no means an error, it just leads to a defensive position for black where the game is equal, the error came on move 11 where 11...Nh7 keeps the game equal but, b5 was played and becomes a target and now white has a better position.
TheSapphireTiger 9 months ago
what is the name of the song?
ClassicsViolin 10 months ago
if he is so great Why retire get the title back for Russia, Garry know he cant, players are to good now, back when he was champion there was no one the Russians new this, and held on to it, Bobby Fischer once said you cant live life till you are champion Fischer was one man, Garry Had a whole chess team behind him, It was like when Fischer left he kind of said here i showed you how its done go ahead and figure it out there are tons of lines to be discover i am tired here you go, he was theBEST
MrDracotheslydrago 10 months ago
and to go down as the greatest player, of chess, Garry did not figure this out on his own, like Fischer did, It was a team of analyzers that kept studying and ob severing, like in the past, and made Garry who he is, Garry is a Clear fake, Its odd that He Kept facing Karpov, Since Fischer left, there was no one like Fischer who can give them a challenge, anyway Garry in game six had no clue what was going on, it funny shows how he was a fake, anyway he retired what why whats he scared of.
MrDracotheslydrago 10 months ago
E4 push it was like Fischer was there, Kasparov can use any excuses he wants he can hide behind his lies, see the Russians where so embarrass by Fischer, the Fischer show that the Russians had it all wrong., he was the founder of this new chess, why he left we will never know, by doing so doing so it was the chance to ruin Fischer, Garry Was a fake, he was the new man by Russian to lead the new ideas of chess founded by Fischer, and allowed he to keep being champion to exceed Booby ratting
MrDracotheslydrago 10 months ago
the human will always be the master of the computer, and the reason is that a computer lacks the imagination
xismxist 11 months ago 22
@xismxist...thank you for the theoretically sound comment. Thanks for watching.
4411417 11 months ago 5
@4411417 your welcome my friend ;)
xismxist 11 months ago
@xismxist
You're right, the computer lacks the imagination... for now.
iperez1909 11 months ago
@xismxist you seriously underestimate the power of computing. by 2050, there will be computers that have the processing power of every single human brain on earth combine, in the size of a LAPTOP
YamSakerII 10 months ago
Comment removed
xismxist 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@YamSakerII Programs with an elo-rating at 2050 stand no chance in hell against a good chess player, in fact even the strongest chessmaster or fritz programs doesnt stand a chance against the worlds best players - sure it could be a draw the first 2 games but over a series, then the player will learn how the program plays and later crush it. The given elorating is wroong too, because i usually defeat chessmaster at 1800 elo, but i have harder time defeating a friend who compete and he has 1700
xismxist 5 days ago
@xismxist
Not in a solved/close to solved game.
XLordSundayX 10 months ago
@xismxist Also, it takes the spirit out of chess. The psychology for example.
Arthounot 9 months ago
@xismxist some day computer will not lack that "imagination"
kajakpaddler92 8 months ago
@xismxist
Since however our brain has come into this world through a process of evolution, why isnt it possible for an electronic brain to do so also? Not through genetical evolution obviously, but through memelogical evolution.
can0mark 6 months ago
@xismxist for now.....
kajakpaddler92 3 months ago
@xismxist thats very wishful thinking from a time strong ai or AGI hasn't even been born yet. Look up "transcendant man" on netflix
umbrellaBuddha 5 days ago
in 0:37 why Kasparov triff e6 und h6 understand only h6 but why d6? And in 0:52 Why Deep Blue made O-O It can example N5c?
David20092 11 months ago
@David20092 And in 0:41 why Deep Blue not x on 7h?
David20092 11 months ago
@basyo1 Kasparov resigned, realizing that the game was already lost for him
BozoDawg 11 months ago
How has it won? This is neither check or checkmate? Kd4?
basyo1 11 months ago
@basyo1 Maybe he resigned? Didn't look that bad though, at least to that point
fundyspokerblog 11 months ago
@basyo1 Kasparov realized that this was a very good computer and that he was too far back to win. he forfeited
TheRealEric31415 11 months ago
The more number of possible moves, the less the "brute force" technique employed by computers works... In a game like GO, with more possibilities than chess, computers can not yet beat the best players. I would like to think we can just keep making more and more complex games (with more possible moves that is) as computers get better and better and always be a step ahead... until they take over, of course.
bryan57s 1 year ago
wow people can't build something useful for once or something to help others... no they just make computers to play chess. wow.
supervinny95 1 year ago
Just remember, the fact we can still beat computers at chess shows the incredible depth of chess. Why doesn't anybody talk about that....and why shouldn't a computer that is powerful enough be able to beat us. After all, there are a finite number of possible moves and combinations of moves.
tacitus7 1 year ago
@tacitus7 The computers are well enough to beat a human, but the games are set so they won't always win.
Eisoptrophobia 1 year ago
you broke YouTube with false animation
njmikec 1 year ago
Animation FAIL, you could've at least done a stop motion thingy
JiggerBooWigger 1 year ago
So sad... A little scary. Machines beating humans in chess... What's next?
NewVahan2 1 year ago
horrible
puchodog1977 1 year ago
black can give up !
iscarus 1 year ago
LOL H6 ????? :)
Thx for posting .....
iscarus 1 year ago
but wasnt kasparovs last move an accident?? or what the hell was the point of letting the queen be taken like that??
ollecarlsson 1 year ago
I CANT UNDERSTAND HOW HE lost?????
SUM1 help me!!!
arquib 1 year ago
@arquib he lost his queen aqnd he had a very bad position
grilloderiver 1 year ago
@arquib he resigned
CombatMedic67 1 year ago
I believe Kasparov lost on purpose. No way he could've gotten beat like that. No way.
Darkblaze10k 1 year ago 5
Just give up chess. Go n play marble. It should be easier.
rolandytho 1 year ago
Hi Everyone,
I guess I'm a bit new to the game, because I can't see the loss. Could someone explain to me how it would have ended, or why it was a loss (and which color was Gary?)?? Thanks!
sebastianquilt 1 year ago
@sebastianquilt
Kasparov was black in this game. For us mortal guys this will only be seen as an advantage for white. but at such a high level its only a matter of technice before Deep blue wins because of his queen. also it must be mention that psycology Kasparov was destroyed. its a movie made based on this match also and why Kasparov was psycology destroyed.
TheSchandorff 1 year ago
@sebastianquilt Gary was black. The reason he resigned was because in the final position he was down the exchange and a pawn (two minor pieces for a queen), and was about to lose another pawn when the computer played c4! Once the knight moves, the Queen will take on f5. Besides for the material deficit Kasparov was facing, his pieces were uncoordinated, his king is stuck in the center and unable to castle, and he has no visible counterplay. Hope this helps!
Fupper16 1 year ago
worst possible stop motion ever
Bosso0 1 year ago 2
Funny how they didn't continue allowing Kasparov to play Deep Blue again. lol
Sileni 1 year ago
also its a great line for white to sac the knight but it is survivable, but extremely difficult against correct play. only the best moves survive.
even if kasparov grind ed it out , I suspect he would have lost on time .
DionMarinos 1 year ago
kasparov was sandbagged for sure by a company that had to win nomatterwhat.
as a 2000 rated player u can tell its a mix of human and computer play .
if uv ever analyzed chess with computers and are decently strong player ul see this .
a dirty move but the best move for ibm in terms of generating sales.
on the flip side it shows that if a gm knows nothing of his opponent and knows nothing of his or her or its preparation /favored lines/style, then even the best can be toppled
DionMarinos 1 year ago
I'm confused.... did kasparov see the "xray" attack on his queen?
MagoMinelli 1 year ago
"xray" attack??? what the hell r u talking about ?? stupid dumb if u dont know a shit about chess dont talk, fool wanker
surfermx 1 year ago
I'm confused... kasparov really didn't see the attack on his queen?
I believe he did... I mean... lol I am not a great chess player but I did see that.
MagoMinelli 1 year ago
Vladimir Putin plays strip poker with Deep Throat.
chocorum3 1 year ago 9
Problem is you couldn't see several moves because they were in phantom. It would have been better if someone's hand had simply visibly moved the pieces. It was too hard to follow the way they did it. Good music though. If someone knows what piece that music is I'd like to know.
richardharris44 2 years ago
That's a nice set, but I might prefer such a formal feeling one to not have the notation guide. Since, if you're good enough at chess to buy yourself such a set, then you're already probably good enough to know the notation at a glance.
InCharacter 2 years ago
finish the match plz... there is no winner when you end
TheCarrShow 2 years ago
Kasparov resigned.
atlscribe 2 years ago
the carrshow, game didnt continue cos kasparov resigned, why no just the stupids dumbs shut up and dont talk about things they dont know?? Tc1 and the Queen will mate black king soon
surfermx 1 year ago
@surfermx pardon me for not knowing everything about chess. I may not have known, or maybe just forgotten the fact that this game was resigned. Now I really never knew, but it would be nice if the video said something like "Kasparov resigns" not just that deep blue won. Also I hope you are not american because if you are you have worse grammar than a 4 year old
TheCarrShow 1 year ago
this isnt clear your an idiot
diamondgeezer22 2 years ago
Your title should say Kasparov vs Deep Blue because Kasparov is white so should be first.
STJukes 2 years ago
kasparov was black
cobaltdan9 2 years ago
Nice to see, thx, but please loose the music!
Malaka57 2 years ago
Deep blue did not beat Kaza.
thegafferlives 2 years ago
che merdfa di video
ilvttable 2 years ago
I'm not a good chess player.... and its hard for me to follow whats going on in this video. Anybody have good advice about learning strategies?
WAKEUPshift111 2 years ago
where was the win? i didnt see a check or a checkmate anywhere
beegburd 2 years ago
He quit.
matthewm888888888888 2 years ago
he resigned.
guy2p 2 years ago
It's kinda obvious. These people think alot of steps ahead. With Tc1 later on black would be in trouble.
ghember 2 years ago
at 1:44, did deep blue trick Kasparov into giving up his queen by playing Bf5, then exf5, then Rxe7?
WeAreBorg359 2 years ago
this fading is soo bad to follow ... If you can't let the figures move, then let it be ...
punpck 2 years ago 35
if you are using images taske an image of the board and the board minus the piece and alternate so it flashes...and after a piece moves
spikeyeyerish 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
is kasparov black or white?
MyMusicalMelody 2 years ago
@MyMusicalMelody Deep Blue is white, and Kasparov is black.
MrEmil20 2 years ago
did you know that karparovs iq is 190?
EmiNeM9711 2 years ago
Oh come on. Another one of you lying about his IQ. It's been officially verified to be 135. IQ measures a lot more than just chess skill, you know.
xiangyik 2 years ago
sry i mean kasparov. and jep your right his iq is 190
EmiNeM9711 2 years ago
I am sorry to point this out, but it seems you are a liar yourself, as no official verification was conducted, and all that our opinions are based on is speculation. However, majority of sources claim that Kasparov's IQ was between 185 and 190, with only 1 (one) reporting it as being 135.
GRom4232 2 years ago
Come on, man. You're just contradicting yourself all over the place. First you say there is no official verification. (There has been--read his books) Then you say one source gives it as 135, which is my actual claim. And then you say a "majority of sources" give it as between 185 and 190. And you don't tell me what these sources are. Kasparov himself said that his IQ was 135. Don't just fall for typical internet exaggeration and trash.
xiangyik 2 years ago
They said kasparov won...
Thefastest9 2 years ago
The first time Kasparov met deep blue he won but IBM went back to the drawing board and came back to beat Kasparov with their next computer. kasparov did not lose ever game in either of those runs. But deepblue proved to have a superior winning record when all was said and done.
soldier4242 2 years ago
he didn't win, in one of the games he tied.
KayferProductions 2 years ago
deep blue take e6 with positional compensation.
deep blue won the game.
nice analysis.
CHARLESPOGSKI 2 years ago
So gary kasparov win?
Thefastest9 2 years ago
i want the deep blue computer to explain. since deep blue gets 200 million moves every second, why did he take e6? aiya i think deep blue somehow cheated, i dunno how. And why wont the pawn directly take that knight, its not bad. Opens for the rook when castled king's side.
Thefastest9 2 years ago
because he knew DB was sacking the knight at e6...he was only trying to pin the knight down rather than jumping on it
DC5Pro 2 years ago
that is horrible for black...he may be technically up a piece...but almost dead lost
etchenba 2 years ago
you need a strategy to beat the computer. you can to use forks and pins...
gosillygirl 2 years ago
Yes, but the beating on e6 is just good for white, no matter who would defend it with black. By the way, what is the name of the music?:P
Armenii93 2 years ago
Kasparov knew about the hitting on e6 guys.... He just didn't realize a computer would play it. A normal computer would play Ne4 instead of hitting on e6. But it was programmed before the game to hit on e6 since they believed kasparov was a bad defender (compared to is amazingly attacking style)
TheSchandorff 2 years ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
Hi guys! Watch my videos. I have Kasparov's and Deep Blue's all 6 matches.
tisoy4ever 2 years ago
why music????
Wwerner25 2 years ago
Still the hitting on e6 is really an interesting move!! Still I admire the way Deep Blue finished the game. kasparov was completly chanseless here. Well done!!
lyberg12 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
This is the first step to the "terminator salvation". Scary. Really really scary fact that a Machine can beat a Man like that. And what are we heading into? The 6th Generation Jets will be Unmanned!
ChessStudent2009 2 years ago
lol I don't think the terminators had GM Joel Benjamin (who worked for IBM) helping them by watching for any mistakes Deep Blue made and over riding the move.
This is why IBM refused to show Kasparov the Deep Blue logs (because it would have shown human interference), refused a re-match and dismantled Deep Blue straight after. In short Kasparov was cheated. Deep Blue with any minor GM (let alone Joel Benjamin) is invincible.
Dessan01 2 years ago
fail
riseofatheism 2 years ago
Deep Blue wasn't intelligent, it was another brute machine without mind!
NightSh4d0W 2 years ago 4
With an attitude like that, you'll be the first to go when the machines take over.
Mettachetta 2 years ago 35
haha
Sure :)
NightSh4d0W 2 years ago 3
@Mettachetta it's impossble for a computer or robot to take over unless we make a learning computer. Even At that there isn't much of a risk. Think, If we only programed something to do one thing, It CAN'T do something else because it can't learn, and dosen't know how.
bob84676 11 months ago
Verdict...Blue cheats deeply
PokerStuffer 2 years ago
how can u beat a machine its almost impossible
dodoboy1212 2 years ago 2
What would be hapenned if at finish black played bxc4?
RDL1984 3 years ago
@RDL1984 qxd4
iscarus 1 year ago
@RDL1984 sorry i mean QxC4 look bischop & King :)
iscarus 1 year ago
@iscarus Thanks!
So very bad blacks position. If QxC4 - Kb8, then Bxb8 - Rxb8 (or Kxb8, QxC6 - another, then QxD5), QxC6+ - Kd8, QxD5+ - Kc8...
RDL1984 1 year ago
@RDL1984 Kb8 ? No, You cannot set king on bischop line look Bischop G3.
After Pawn x C4 >> QxC4 - KB7(only move to save bischop) QA6 Checkmate !!! Its Done do you see :))))
Later ......
iscarus 1 year ago
@iscarus Sorry, I wanted to say Nb8 (Knight, not King)...
RDL1984 1 year ago
@RDL1984 :) Ok NB7 >> NE5 !!!
iscarus 1 year ago
Comment removed
michaelhays92 8 months ago
@michaelhays92 QxF5
iscarus 8 months ago
Comment removed
michaelhays92 8 months ago
@michaelhays92 Aha I know what you mean :) Yeah after Qxc4 - Nb4 i like white move > D5 :)
Nice move huh .
iscarus 8 months ago
@michaelhays92 Dude are you kidding me!? After 1. c4 bxc4 2. Qxc4 Nb4 (which is what would have been played, as you say correctly) the position is absolutely crushing for white. In fact, my engine evaluates it as a +4.2. Kasparov has no chance. You need to brush up on how to evaluate positions correctly.
DancingWasabi 4 months ago
@DancingWasabi Lol, fuck you. My engine evaluates it as +0.30. Get a better engine bitch, don't make yourself look like an idiot when dealing with the pros, kid. You need to brush up on how to evaluate positions correctly, fucker.
michaelhays92 4 months ago
@michaelhays92 If you actually evaluate the position correctly after Nb4 (which for some reason you had to assign an exclamation mark to because you're an idiot) it becomes clear that white wins AT LEAST two pieces for a rook in an open position where black's done. "Semi-equal position" my ass. Oh but of course, we should listen to this so-called "pro" michaelhays92! Let this idiot lead us to believe the position is equal while Kasparov himself, the real pro, resigned it. Gtfo kid.
DancingWasabi 4 months ago
@DancingWasabi Bahahahahaha, you are honestly too stupid to argue with. Learn how to play the game, and then we'll talk. You are honestly so pathetic. And if you've really been playing chess longer than I've been on this earth, then you are a very immature geezer. Play me if you really think you're such a pro, you waste of space. Get a life and stop trying to defend yourself when you are CLEARLY wrong. Gtfo old man.
michaelhays92 4 months ago
@michaelhays92 Once again you yell like a child instead of arguing properly. See in order to make a point, you need evidence. I have provided mine; now where is the evidence supporting your idiotic claim that the position is equal?? Calling me names does not prove anything, except that you are immature. So tell me, oh wise one, how exactly am I, and therefore Kasparov himself, "CLEARLY wrong"?
DancingWasabi 4 months ago
@DancingWasabi Hahaha. I love how you wasted your time with this. Get a life fag, and I mean fag not in the gay way, but the much more offensive way (worthless loser)
michaelhays92 1 month ago
@michaelhays92 And I can show you all of the lines, EVERY SINGLE ONE, where black is destroyed after Nb4 (through substantial material gain and a crushing position). But of course someone like you wouldn't care to look at actual facts, but instead try to insult someone who's probably been playing chess longer than you've been on this earth. But please, continue to hide behind the Internet's veil of anonymity and keep whining. You can really accomplish a lot that way.
DancingWasabi 4 months ago
machine are stupid fast
people are smart slow
exrun 3 years ago 6
i dont understand why ppl say deep blue cheated, i mean it's a computer and it learns from mistakes, but kasparov had to be a sore loser, not wanting to accept defeat. but even IF IBM cheated, kasparov still should have been able to defeat deep blue because i dont think the a few IBM geeks who are controlling deep blue from another room could still beat kasparov.
gbmack2000 3 years ago
people are saying deep blue cheated because of THAT purpose that you mentioned. That Deep Blue was not necessarily controlled, but had an advantage; claiming that Deep Blue was allowed to preview Kasparov's earlier tournament games.
striker1208 3 years ago
Anyone who thinks deep blue cheated is on the same intellectual level as the people who think Bush orchestrated 9/11. There is ZERO evidence that any cheating was involved. Previewing your opponent's previous games about as far from cheating as you can get.
ThrasybulusBrig 2 years ago 2
While I'm not entirely convinced that Deep Blue cheated, there is definitely evidence that they did. One, circumstantial evidence--deep blue never competed again after that match. Why the freak not? What gives?? Second, the IBM team made no effort to make their moves transparent. The Deep Blue machine was nowhere to be found.
jk59beads 2 years ago
I don't know why Deep Blue didn't compete. Perhaps you should google Deep Blue and find out. What do you meen by transparency? Please elaborate.
ThrasybulusBrig 2 years ago
i dont see how IBM cheated
what, they used another computer?pshh
and if they used other ppl, then thats just saying kasparov's not the best.
hes still hella good. wish fischer was alive to play him
17thbox 2 years ago 3
If there was cheating (I'm not saying that it was, I woudn't know because I haven't really looked in to the issue) there is no need for the cheating player to be better than Kasparov.
Kasparov knew very well of the materialistic favoring of computers back then and was looking to trap the computer with better strategy. He could very well know what the best move was but simply not be expecting the computer to find it because of the inherit weakness of it to evaluate strategic positions.
GustafSjoblom 2 years ago 2
its a machine with all the moves from previous grand masters just a machine analizing 200 million movs a sec. makes no mistakes then losses the 1st game takes kasparovs movs and then magically wins by memorizing kasparovs movs thats cheating Kasparov is still the best ever.,....
adrean85si 3 years ago
LOL, Deep Blue owned this arrogant buffoon! He called it stupid before he even played it!
mikestein5000 3 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
lol Deep blue did not cheat. Gary kasparov was trained by the Russians who had computers to figure out a way to counter Bobby Fischer game style, chess computers where quite advance. Any ways thats not important. Cause Russians are need to hide there shame in how they thought chess, so all in all Gary Kasparov when u lost this game and at that moment did you feel like that Bobby Fischer was on the other end,
Only Fischer would of seen that move, he knew when to strike. it was Kasparov vs Fischer
dracotheslydrago 3 years ago
You're incorrect actually; Deep Blue does NOT learn from mistakes. All it does is analyze the current board state and make an optimal move based on that, at least until the end game, although it cannot look at EVERY strategy; I believe to beat Kasparov it was looking at the possibilities for 11 moves ahead. At the end game, it switches strategies and just analyzes every possible move and choose the best.
6mbd 2 years ago
Not to mention, Kasparov BLUNDERED with a6. Did Deep Blue make him blunder? I mean the idea that because a a computer beat a human it must mean the computer cheated is absurd on its face.
ThrasybulusBrig 2 years ago
Deep blue used brute force to win. It could process millions of moves per second. No mind, no matter how intelligent, can process at a level equal to it. Unless of course you remove all other functions of the mind and focus it completely around chess.
InvertedKira 2 years ago 2
That's definitely not true, because Kasparov smashed deep blue in game one. Brute force alone didn't help Deep Blue in that game--the only way it could ave won game two was by learning from past mistakes.
jk59beads 2 years ago 3
Third, Deep Blue's style of play was radically different in game two from its play in game 1. It declined Kasparov's pawn sac, selecting an intangible positional advantage over taking material. That is quite unbecoming of a "machine" that analyzed its positions only by "brute force."
jk59beads 2 years ago 2
Yes, Deep Blue and its programers made adjustments. What is so u nusual about that? Deep Blue's improved play is perfectly consistent with progress and innovation.
ThrasybulusBrig 2 years ago
Exactly. The computer's programming was modified between matches in much the same way someone changes their playstyle after recognizing a mistake they made. So while the computer itself wasn't changing its play, it still can be very different from one game to another.
poof312 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Amazing, the only thing better would be if you had Rihanna's "Distubia" playing instead! Care to do a remix?
RafaelNadal11 3 years ago
After the match Deep Blue went back to its hotel room to celebrate with two Gameboys and a laptop
got2hurt 3 years ago 49
@got2hurt yep its been told that there were some cellphone hookers and that they were snorting,fuck,even shooting electricity.I bet it was a night full of lols and lmaos.
GlennsMisfits 1 year ago
@got2hurt thx for spoil
Alexon88 1 year ago
Even after all these years, I still can't believe Kasparov made such a massively careless mistake...
awmob 3 years ago
hey, he's only human, ain't he?
Fu345 3 years ago
its game 6, hes probably beat up and mooshy inside, getting hotheaded and jitty to win, and all this underneath being a world champ and having a lot of focus on you and stuff, lots of things BESIDES the actual game to bear on your shoulders.
GinoTheSinner 3 years ago
Imagine, the presure
djones1213 3 years ago
From what I've heard, you can buy chess software very inexpensively or even download it from some sites free like Winboard. Anyway, a lot of this average software nowadays is just as good if not a little better than deep blue.
WeAreBorg359 3 years ago
I wonder how long it will be before we can all buy a chess computer with the same power as Deep Blue (or more) and the same book moves, after all, it has been over 10 years.
got2hurt 3 years ago
no one can beat it...
deadpeng 3 years ago
most programs on computers can be as good as deep blue
Philosphes 3 years ago
the music was so annoying..........
HitomiCOD2 3 years ago
It was Led Zeppelin man!
jaredplane 3 years ago
well... looks like it isnt my type of music. =(
HitomiCOD2 3 years ago
Go back to you Kanye West and Diddy, and leave real music to the adults then.
Alfrunk 3 years ago
Kanye West and Diddy suck too. and so do u.
HitomiCOD2 3 years ago 6
it was a led zep cover... and I really wanna know who did it.
Fu345 3 years ago
On the game Chessmaster 10, you can view all the games of this and more famous games. Also get your ass kicked by the chessmaster.
holyshitlolz 3 years ago 3
@holyshitlolz Yeah i got it :)
I like fischer ! damn he is the most nuts chessplayer ever ! sacrifice 8 points and winning the games :))))))
iscarus 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
buddy you missed a few. there isn't a even a check when the video ends
Ihavetopushmycar 3 years ago
thats because kasparov reigned buddy
criii1723 3 years ago
Looks like you haven't played/watched professional chess at all buddy, Kasparov resigned (surrendered), knowing all hope for a decisive victory was lost after his little a6 blunder. After white's 19th move, he 0-1'd.
lpjuunin 2 years ago
well at least you take the time to read through every comment going to about a year back
Ihavetopushmycar 2 years ago 2
do you mean h6?
llstevej 2 years ago
this video sucks, I want grandmaster evaluation of all the pitfalls and alternative book lines that are slightly better, as well as the point before Kaspy loses the init where the game should have gone and what the result position might have looked like draws wins at least 5
and where deepblue actually started thinking, from what i heard deep never even got out of j databas play stored (grandmaster move) move... i think they shouldv given kaspy a takeback . Deepblue w/oopenbok+data=1900elo ha!
DeepGlue555 3 years ago
Very strange game, Kasparov playing a Karpov line, and even knows that 7... h6? is a mistake
aedra2001 3 years ago 2
Kasparov is a human player, how do you know what he was thinking?
Xtrashit 3 years ago
One word....cool
MLCichlid 3 years ago 2