People forget that Kasparov beat Deep Thought, beat Deep Blue in the 1996 series, and drew Deep Jr, and X3d Fritz. He did lose to Deep Blue in the 1997 series, which seems to be the only thing anyone remembers. His actual record against supercomputers is 2 wins, 1 loss, 2 ties. The loss has remained in question (possible human intervention) and one of the ties he took when he was clearly ahead, but that was his own decision.
So it goes, the IBM crew wouldn't let anyone inside their operations room. A human selectively choosing candidate moves for a computer to jump 2 or 3 ply even is an astronomical advantage the difference between going, say 15 deep and 18--those numbers get huge on the back end. Also, the IBM crew would not accept clear draws, proving only that computers don't get tired.
By his own admission, Kasparov did not want to play, because in his mind he believed that there was human intervention (cheating) involved. In Game 1, he smashed the computer, but in Game 2, Deep Blue did not behave the way it was supposed to by not biting Kasparov's pawn sacrifice. Inconsistent with computer style of play (i.e., gathering material), so Garry felt that IBM was cheating. IBM refused to show Game 2's computer logs, and subsequently dismantled Deep Blue. Fishy?
@RK831 Deep blue also made a move that allowed perpetual check. which of course should have been detected by any moderate chess engine and avoided.also that ibm didn't show any logs is very strange, i dunno but actually it is easy to provide those logs just to clarify those accusations. who knows ... kasparov did well if you consider the circumstances.
a machine may have beaten a human in chess but it should never be able to hold the title of world master, hopefully they won't let a computer own that title. EVER!
yeah i know modern chess computers would win everything, thats why im saying HOPEFULLY they wont be stupid enough to allow machines to compete. I think this world is crazy enough to actually allow such a thing.
White Knight g5*e6 ( move 8) is the key point of the game: a blunder for a player like Kasparov ( black) and a great attacking move for Deep Blue: the machine started to excel humans.
really. and i quote, "American want to do anythings to won !!!!
but look to that thaey are making a machine to won on a human ,, coz they can't won by thier oun humans !!!!!" - 9yad. ...
what the hell is the world coming too? look at that! what the hell? I mean, it's either an illiterate troll (mispelled illiterate, i think) or somone who "cough" isn't american and wants to start an argument. I mean, Its a bastard or a nationalist. damn it...
Silver vs bronze is the most fucked up combination! Success to u idiot !!
rolandytho 2 months ago
@rolandytho You're just jelly...
MaxLinc5555 2 months ago
People forget that Kasparov beat Deep Thought, beat Deep Blue in the 1996 series, and drew Deep Jr, and X3d Fritz. He did lose to Deep Blue in the 1997 series, which seems to be the only thing anyone remembers. His actual record against supercomputers is 2 wins, 1 loss, 2 ties. The loss has remained in question (possible human intervention) and one of the ties he took when he was clearly ahead, but that was his own decision.
nezpercenathan 1 year ago
So it goes, the IBM crew wouldn't let anyone inside their operations room. A human selectively choosing candidate moves for a computer to jump 2 or 3 ply even is an astronomical advantage the difference between going, say 15 deep and 18--those numbers get huge on the back end. Also, the IBM crew would not accept clear draws, proving only that computers don't get tired.
Odhinn222 1 year ago
i like that tune . it reminds me of an old computer game :D
LivingIsSuicide 1 year ago
whatever possessed you to put this godawful "music" on here, it's brutal.
AlexisCapri 1 year ago 3
@AlexisCapri, mute it if you don't enjoy it.
MaxLinc5555 1 year ago
how did the computer cheat? did it make kasparov look away and move his pieces?
NinjaDog251 1 year ago
@NinjaDog251 the computer itself didn't cheat. IBM did.
Logixmaster 1 year ago
By his own admission, Kasparov did not want to play, because in his mind he believed that there was human intervention (cheating) involved. In Game 1, he smashed the computer, but in Game 2, Deep Blue did not behave the way it was supposed to by not biting Kasparov's pawn sacrifice. Inconsistent with computer style of play (i.e., gathering material), so Garry felt that IBM was cheating. IBM refused to show Game 2's computer logs, and subsequently dismantled Deep Blue. Fishy?
RK831 2 years ago 6
@RK831 Deep blue also made a move that allowed perpetual check. which of course should have been detected by any moderate chess engine and avoided.also that ibm didn't show any logs is very strange, i dunno but actually it is easy to provide those logs just to clarify those accusations. who knows ... kasparov did well if you consider the circumstances.
LivingIsSuicide 1 year ago
i liked this video :)
jdghgh 2 years ago
shit video
PROTLxONgame 2 years ago
what a crap vid
harryhakbijl 2 years ago
See my chess vids.
STJukes 2 years ago
Chess computers should not be allowed to use opening book moves unless it deduces them itself. Let the computer figure out it's own moves.
john17972 2 years ago 5
@john17972 Hey I've had people use opening book moves on me too.
It just means that even if they win, they aren't as good as they would like to believe.
However, I would still respect the player regardless of winning or losing because I can't be bothered to remember any book moves.
soccom8341576 1 year ago
nice game end in 19 moves , but rememper that the human who creates the computer
balackooo 2 years ago
a machine may have beaten a human in chess but it should never be able to hold the title of world master, hopefully they won't let a computer own that title. EVER!
eiroight 2 years ago 2
@eiroight What do you mean? Obviously computers aren't allowed to compete in human tournaments, modern chess computers would win everything.
Bobstew68 2 years ago
yeah i know modern chess computers would win everything, thats why im saying HOPEFULLY they wont be stupid enough to allow machines to compete. I think this world is crazy enough to actually allow such a thing.
eiroight 2 years ago
Not checkmate. Resignation.
raptriforcee 3 years ago 2
White Knight g5*e6 ( move 8) is the key point of the game: a blunder for a player like Kasparov ( black) and a great attacking move for Deep Blue: the machine started to excel humans.
Hengistnew 3 years ago
no it didnt. kasparov was tired and frustrated with the antics of the IBM team.
He has drawn 2 matches with computers superior to Deep blue.
If IBM really wanted to prove something they should have accepted his offer of a rematch. The ran scared
DLPBurke 2 years ago 7
obviously
speedtreex 3 years ago
sorry for the mis-sent comment! I was commenting to someone else!
z3ziman 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"chess is for n00bs" This coming from the biggest noob ever.
slyvoltaire 3 years ago
he needed it to watch porn
x69flash69x 3 years ago
American want to do anythings to won !!!!
but look to that thaey are making a machine to won on a human ,, coz they can't won by thier oun humans !!!!!
9yad 3 years ago
really. and i quote, "American want to do anythings to won !!!!
but look to that thaey are making a machine to won on a human ,, coz they can't won by thier oun humans !!!!!" - 9yad. ...
what the hell is the world coming too? look at that! what the hell? I mean, it's either an illiterate troll (mispelled illiterate, i think) or somone who "cough" isn't american and wants to start an argument. I mean, Its a bastard or a nationalist. damn it...
directed at 9yad
speedtreex 3 years ago
what song is this
delmar1985 3 years ago 2
Diesel Raven by Chris Clark
MaxLinc5555 3 years ago
çes siksin seni
DeNzTR 3 years ago
nice man ;)
KaRmAn360 3 years ago