Kasparov won the Deep Blue, and DB has a programation to always do the best move. So, did DB made a mistake?
Every single decisive game ever played, including games between Stockfish and Rybka or any other combination of engines, has been due to a decisive, demonstrable mistake (or several mistakes).
If there was ever a game played that was won without a demonstrable mistake, this thread would be done, and so would chess.
SmyslovFan ... What you're saying isn't entirely true. Many decisive games required numerous demonstrable "mistakes." Although I would call them subtle errors and not so demonstrable. I can think of 1 very good example and an interview to go along with it. I must find the article. Kramnik was discussing all the former world champions. He said he lost a game to Karpov and that after the game, he still didn't understand what he had done wrong.
Justs99171 If Kramnik lost a game to Karpov and did not understand what he had done wrong--it was probably fairly soon after the game.
If Karpov was asked again, he probably would know what he did wrong.
The fact that one super grandmaster is perplexed about one game proves very little or nothing.
Kasparov won the Deep Blue, and DB has a programation to always do the best move. So, did DB made a mistake?
OH! Come on now, are you kidding? Deep Blue did not and has not a program to always do the best move.
It is or was programmed to always play the best move it could find--which does not necessarily mean the actual very best move.
ponz111, Kramnik said he didn't understand after the game or soon after the game. I will find the article for you.
Interviewer – Has Karpov followed the versatile pattern?
Kramnik – Of course he has. Additionally, there is something mysterious about his play, no one else could cope with things like he did. It is easier for me to talk about Karpov because his collection of games was my first chess book. I studied his work when I was a child, later I played quite a few games against him. He is a versatile chess player, a good tactician who brilliantly calculates lines and positionally very strong. He also has a distinctive feature. Funnily enough, he has effectively denied Steinitz’s pronouncement: if you have an advantage you must attack, otherwise, you will lose it. When having an edge, Karpov often marked time and still gained the advantage! I don’t know anyone else who could do that, it’s incredible. I was always impressed and delighted by this skill. When it looked like it was high time to start a decisive attack, Karpov played a3, h3, and his opponent’s position collapsed.
Karpov defeated me in Linares-94 where he scored 11 out of 13. I got into an inferior endgame. However, it did not seem awful. Then I made some appropriate moves and could not understand how I had managed to get into a losing position. Although I was already in the world top ten, I failed to understand it even after the game. This was one of the few games after which I felt like a complete idiot with a total lack of chess understanding! Such things happen very rarely to top level players. Usually you realise why you have lost. This moment defies description – there is something almost imperceptible about it and so characteristic of Karpov.
http://playchessopenings.com/2014/10/25/chess-interview-kramnik-on-the-world-champions/
"Funnily enough, he has effectively denied Steinitz’s pronouncement: if you have an advantage you must attack, otherwise, you will lose it. When having an edge, Karpov often marked time and still gained the advantage!"
Very interesting insight!
That part you bolded is really interesting to hear too. Such humility by Kramnik there. I'd suspect Carlsen takes that sort of thing to the next level.
He [Kramnik] failed to understand what he did wrong in one game vs Karpov. This was right after the game.
This was also a long time ago [1994] if I am correct?
But now he knows what he did wrong....[this is my point]
Kasparov won the Deep Blue, and DB has a programation to always do the best move. So, did DB made a mistake?
OH! Come on now, are you kidding? Deep Blue did not and has not a program to always do the best move.
It is or was programmed to always play the best move it could find--which does not necessarily mean the actual very best move.
Agreed
Kramnik was a top 10 player and he didn't understand what he had done wrong after the game. There wasn't a single demonstrable mistake made in the game.
This is contrary to what two people posting here have said.
By 1994, Kramnik was already one of the strongest players ever to have played.
I was reading a chapter on Karpov in a book "The March of Chess Ideas." The author, Anthony Saidy, an international master, lost a game to Karpov. Even after having lost that game and publishing a book, the author didn't know what he had done wrong. He chalked it up to a blunder in a time scramble, but his position was total garbage and losing before that.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1067691
is contrary to what two people posting here have said.
By 1994, Kramnik was already one of the strongest players ever to have played.
I was reading a chapter on Karpov in a book "The March of Chess Ideas." The author, Anthony Saidy, an international master, lost a game to Karpov. Even after having lost that game and publishing a book, the author didn't know what he had done wrong. He chalked it up to a blunder in a time scramble, but his position was total garbage and losing before that. because a mere master does not know why he lost a game to a supergrandmaster means little. It just means he [Anthony Saidy] did not understand the error or errors he [Saidy] made. Saidy, while a good player, was not all that strong, I think only about 2330.
It's been known for many decades that chess is depressing. The only way anyone can ever win a game is if his or her opponent blunders. Every GM knows this. They know the reason for losing is because they made a mistake. They may not know what that mistake was sometimes, but they know they made a mistake.
The argument that chess isn't necessarily a draw may intrigue some people here, but just about every grandmaster accepts this to be true. Their authority on this does matter.
Until proven otherwise, the operating assumption of chess is that it's a draw with best play. That assumption still holds true after tens of millions of recorded games.
If we can getta computer to think for itself (AI) then we'll find out if chess is a draw at 10,000 elo.
And something else ?....chess isn't a draw right now at about 3000 elo, correct ?
Ghostess Chess is a draw when neither side makes an error, regardless of their rating.
Geez. I'm not going to go into the "Chess is like Clockwork" thing because it's too abstract and loose in definition. More of an opinion than a actual fact. What is truly missing in this conversation, although it's been mentioned in passing or non-chalantly, is the Human element.
Indeed Humans evolve, computers/engines do not. They upgrade as engineers, programmers, and definitely Chess consultants grow: in thinking, tech what have you...
8/
ponz, I am sure that ratings are related to the likelihood of making an error. The lower the rating, the more likely a player will make an error. I suspect that the equations that make chess a draw take no account of the human factor.
false
I can see it now, an endgame tablebase with 32 men...feeling the starting position must be a draw, just setting up 6 men of equal value for both sides in symetrical starting positions yields draw ad-nauseam
Of course the higher the rating, the less chance to make an error. And the lower the rating, the more likely a player will make an error.
In the average game there are many errors.
All of this has little to do with a game where there are no errors.
The fact that a supergrandmaster did not perceive an error immediately after one of the games he lost, has nothing to do with a game where there are no errors.
And has been stated many times, we will never have a 32 men table base.
We can only go by the ton of evidence we have now--and it all indicates chess is a draw if neither side makes an error.
Kasparov won the Deep Blue, and DB has a programation to always do the best move. So, did DB made a mistake?