x
Chess - Play & Learn

Chess.com

FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store

VIEW

Garry Kasparov vs. Deep Blue All games

  • #1

  • #2

    The last game was pretty pitiful for a GM.

  • #3

    Any comments thanking me for posting a huge series of famous games Tongue outWink

  • #4

    Gosh I'm not trying to "spoil kasparovs authority" or anything I'm just posting some of the games I am aware that there were six more and that you can find them almost anywhere but I posted them on chess.com so everyone who doesn't want to go searching for them can just get them here. Also if I wrote down what I thought about the moves it would look pretty lousy because I am not a great player and I am smart enough to realize that.

  • #5

    Yes I take that back it was not "pitiful" but he was in bad condition and mad at IBM because they may have cheated.

  • #6

    What was the main reason do you think?

  • #7
    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • #8

    Kasparov wins the 1996 match 4–2
    Deep blue wins the 1997 match 3½–2½

    Kasparov has a plus score against Deep Blue with 4 wins, 5 draws, and 3 losses.

  • #9

    That last game is pretty amazing! Deep Blue's knight sac, and the ensuing dominance of the position was great!

  • #10

    Kasparov's strategy was to confuse Deep Blue by playing weird(ish) openings and making moves to try to mess up it's calculations. I think it worked very well for the first game but not for the rest...I wonder why there where so many draws.

  • #11
    FifthDimension wrote:

    ...I wonder why there where so many draws.


    Balanced equal positions that would lead to either 3-move repetitions or drawn endgames?

  • #12

    Maybe...

  • #13

    Explain how IBM "cheated" against Kasparov.  This I gotta see.  Did they use a computer or something?  Tongue out

  • #14

    I watched the movie Deep Blue a week ago which inspired me to write this topic in the movie they REALLY made it sound like IBM changed the computer and did all this stuff to win.

  • #15

    It was part of the agreement that IBM could adjust Deep Blue during the match. If that was the issue, then Kasparov would have argued about that as soon as IBM team said, "We have a lot of work to do tonight," after Deep Blue's defeat in Game 1 of the 1997 Rematch.

    Kasparov complained that IBM had a strong human master assist the computer, but that could have easily been proven with the logs of each game. But IBM decided not to hand them over to the Kasparov team because of Garry's accusations.

    FYI, Deep Blue's "cleaned-up" log for Game 6 in 1997 is printed in the book, "Deep Blue: An Artificiaql Intelligence Milestone" by Monty Newborn.

  • #16
    chessroboto wrote:

    It was part of the agreement that IBM could adjust Deep Blue during the match. If that was the issue, then Kasparov would have argued about that as soon as IBM team said, "We have a lot of work to do tonight," after Deep Blue's defeat in Game 1 of the 1997 Rematch.

    Kasparov complained that IBM had a strong human master assist the computer, but that could have easily been proven with the logs of each game. But IBM decided not to hand them over to the Kasparov team because of Garry's accusations.

    FYI, Deep Blue's "cleaned-up" log for Game 6 in 1997 is printed in the book, "Deep Blue: An Artificiaql Intelligence Milestone" by Monty Newborn.


    OK that makes some things clear.

  • #17

    Thanks for the posting!

  • #18

    If you really want to see the complete picture of the IBM Deep Blue stories, you should read "Behind Deep Blue" by Feng-hsiung Hsu (chip engineer and engine re-programmer for 1997 DB) AND "An American Grandmaster" by Joel Benjamin (resident grandmaster for opening book preparation for 1997 DB).

    You will read the explanation behind Deep Blue's behavior throughout the 12 matches, especially the most controversial ones such as as Game 2 in 1997. Laughing Basically, Deep Blue was re-engineered, re-programmed and prepared brilliantly, but old bugs in the code (originating from learning how to code for Deep Thought) still plagued the engine.

    The most disappointing fact was that Hsu was willing to defend Deep Blue (using an ever better chip and more advanced programming) in a third match, but IBM pulled their backing for the project, no thanks to Garry's accusations. Hsu struggled to get the match sponsored, but Garry lost interest in it, probably because there was significantly less money in the pot.

  • #19
    duncanduncan wrote:

    Thanks for the posting!


    You are very welcome!!

  • #20

    thannk you @FifthDimension for posting this.

    Suggestions why kasparov eated last bishop so he loses the queen?

Online Now