Kasparov 1, chess computer 0 (Human wins first game in rematch)

PMSNBC ^

[Recovering_Democrat]

Chalk one up for gray matter.

[AntiGuv]

Woohoo! But what if HAL's just playing with us?? Hmmm...

[altair]

"Once he was able to remove the queens from the board, it was just arithmetic," said commentator and international grand master Maurice Ashley.

That's a strange comment. Arithmetic is the computer's strong point.

[PianoMan]

Sounds like, because Kasparov moved first, that advantage was enough for any grand master to put a game away once the Queens were gone.

[SAJ]

The man is on a mission.

Take 'em down, Garry!

[this_ol_patriot]

Wasn't even close.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1260051

[Event "FIDE Man-Machine WC"]
[Site "New York USA"]
[Date "2003.01.26"]
[EventDate "2003.01.26"]
[Round "1"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Garry Kasparov"]
[Black "Deep Junior"]
[ECO "D45"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "53"]

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e3 e6 5.Nf3 Nbd7 6.Qc2 Bd6 7.g4 dxc4 8.Bxc4 b6 9.e4 e5 10.g5 Nh5 11.Be3 O-O 12.O-O-O Qc7 13.d5 b5 14.dxc6 bxc4 15.Nb5 Qxc6 16.Nxd6 Bb7 17.Qc3 Rae8 18.Nxe8 Rxe8 19.Rhe1 Qb5 20.Nd2 Rc8 21.Kb1 Nf8 22.Ka1 Ng6 23.Rc1 Ba6 24.b3 cxb3 25.Qxb3 Ra8 26.Qxb5 Bxb5 27.Rc7 1-0

[tictoc]

I watched the game live on FICS (www.freechess.org).

It was fun! Having 250 chess players, from patzers to 2100+ rated players, pitch in with often raucously funny comments, was a lot more entertaining than following the official chess site with its very meager commentary.

HOWEVER -

If you are conspiracy minded, you have to wonder if the fix wasn't in.

Kasparov picked a rare line in the Semi-Slav (7. g4), but it shouldn't have mattered to the computer, which ought to have every grandmaster game ever played since Paul Morphy tore up the chessboard stored in its memory.

And yet it spent ages agonizing over its ninth move. Only Kasparov's 13th move (d5) was a novelty. Until then, every single move followed a previous game.

The two programmers of Deep Junior used to work for Kasparov on his sadly now defunct kasparovchess.com web site. This isn't necessarily a present conflict of interest.

But I wonder about his comment in the press conference afterward, when he said that he had prepared himself to exploit weaknesses not in Deep Junior, but in its programming team.

In any case, this is probably the last man-machine match we will ever see. Soon the idea of pitting a human against a chess computer will seem as nonsensical as having Arnold compete against a forklift.

[Marc Poor]

17. ...Rae8. I can make that move, and I don't contemplate 3 million moves a second. Sheesh.

[onedoug]

Even if it could win, the computer is human built. Big deal.

[ewing]

Didn't Kasparov claim that the programmers in the first match were helping the computer?

[Paradox]

Deep Junior, although a computer program, is not like "Deep Blue" or whatever the other program which wins is. The latter is a brute force of computational hypergonadalism, the former, Junior, tries to use more of a "human" technique to win. Its only 1/10 as powerful as Blue.

Kasparov has already practiced against the program and developed strategies against it. Junior is also supposed to learn a bit as well.

[Marc Poor]

Arithmetic is the computer's strong point.

Maybe so, but 2 plus 2 will not equal 5, no matter how much time the computer spends calculating it.

[vollmond]

Early in the game, Deep Junior stunned experts when it paused for 25 minutes to contemplate a countermove to Kasparov’s attack.

Good luck using that attack next time. That countermove is now flagged as unviable. Deep Blue was programmed to beat Kasparov out of the box. Deep Junior will learn how to beat him instead, which is infinitely more scary. All of this just in time for T3.

[PetroniDE]

Hey, Gore invented the computer. That explains it.
Computer asking for a do-over.

[Michael2001]

So Paul Bunyan beats the chainsaw

[supercat]

In any case, this is probably the last man-machine match we will ever see. Soon the idea of pitting a human against a chess computer will seem as nonsensical as having Arnold compete against a forklift.

It's too bad that Kasparov vs the World got botched up by MS' failure to post Irina Krush's analysis of why Qe4 was a losing move. That would have been a particularly interesting game, since the game was winnable for Kasparov at that point but not by the winning line he claimed; had he played what he claimed was his winning line, the world would have [with ideal] play been able to force a draw. So it would have been interesting to see if Kasparov found the right winning line or, if he didn't, whether the world found the right drawing line.

[Monty22]

That move is incredibly wrong. I don't think a cheap pocket chess game would screw that up.

[S.O.S121.500]

"That's a strange comment. Arithmetic is the computer's strong point."

"First" is FIRST. "Second" is the FIRST LOSER. White is always the advantaged side of the board IF one can maintain the advantage.

[Krafty123]

Arithmetic in chess has a slightly different connotation than its conventional use. When you see someone win by arithmetic; it means that the individual in question already had a material advantage - in this case Kasparov's rook vs DJ's knight - and then swapped the other pieces (in this case the queen) off the board. The end result would be a rook and some pawns vs. a knight and some pawns, which is a simple win.