Many media sources compare this Kramnik – Fritz match to Kasparov – Deep Blue match. Is this a fair comparison? Which match is more exciting to you? 
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
Fair or unfair comparison?
About Author
The Kasparov-Deep Blue was more exciting, because it settled a decades old dispute:”can a computer ever defeat the actual world champion?”
Whether Kasparov acknowledges it or not, the computer defeated the world champion. With that match the dispute was OVER. Kasparov could never substantiate his accusations that the IBM team cheated (just as Topalov couldn’t substantiate the bathroom cheating accusations). Therefore the match was valid, the decades old dispute was settled.
The Kramnik-Fritz competition is very interesting, but it no longer have the “yes or no” issue attached to it. If Fritz wins people can say:”what’s the big deal? We already knew that computers can defeat the best chess players”. If Kramnik wins people can say:”well…Deep Blue was a better computer (and/or program)”, or “next time perhaps the computer will win”.
That is the difference between the two match (Kasparov-Deep Blue, Kramnik-Fritz)
Gabor
The two matches are simply not comparable:
1. While Kramnik had full access to Fritz 10, Kasparov never saw any Deep Blue games, and could not prepare properly.
2. Fritz 10 is publicly available. Deep Blue was immediately dismantled after the match, making it impossible to prove that there was no human intervention helping Deep Blue during the games.
3. Fritz 10 is much stronger than Deep Blue as a chess player.
>> Deep Fritz 10: it is a question of speed
29.11.2006 Fritz 10 is already a beast, one of the most powerful chess playing entities on the planet. In its multi-processor version, Deep Fritz 10 runs almost twice as fast on the modern dual core computers, giving you not just additional playing strength, but also the critical seconds you need when analysing with the computer. You can order it now or read more details here.
I am nauseated by this amateur spiel extolling Fritz 10 in ChessBase. Just go to the latest CEGT sites to see Fritz 10 torn to pieces by Rybka 2.2.
>>Kasparov could never substantiate his accusations that the IBM team cheated (just as Topalov couldn’t substantiate the bathroom cheating accusations).
Topalov could and did substantiate his cheating accusations with hard evidence – photos and official protocol. He couldn’t do this during the match because of intimidation from “high” places.
“Topalov could and did substantiate his cheating accusations with hard evidence – photos and official protocol. He couldn’t do this during the match because of intimidation from “high” places.”
How so? Reading Danailov ‘press releases’ again are you?
I think you are the one who is “high”.
>> How so? Reading Danailov ‘press releases’ again are you?
I think you are the one who is “high”.
A very wrong thinking. Think harder.
>>Topalov could and did substantiate his cheating accusations with hard evidence – photos and official protocol.
>>
Elvis is still alive, too. There are people who’ve seen him!
>>He couldn’t do this during the match because of intimidation from “high” places.
>>
Ah. He did it after the match. But of course, you can’t actually show it to us, because of… something. Boy, how often have we heard this before?
Seriously, it’s okay if you want to lie to yourself about it. But Topalov has still permanently disgraced himself for no good reason, and that blemish isn’t going away.
If he had really believed that Kramnik was cheating and that FIDE wasn’t going to support their own champion (the very idea! LOL!), then he would have walked out of the match, not deliberately violated FIDE Ethics Rules and put himself squarely in the wrong.
In fact, he told us that himself in the Game 6 Press Conference: hat he believed Kramnik’s play was fair and that his continued participation in the match proved that he believed that. According to you, Topalov was lying about that. Odd sort of way to defend him…
>> But of course, you can’t actually show it to us, because of… something. Boy, how often have we heard this before?
Go to this link to see the evidence:
http://www.trud.bg/Default.asp?statid=39851&rubr=0&izd=2&fsize
and shut up forever. No more bullshit from you.
>>A very wrong thinking. Think harder.
>>
Why should we do your work for you? LOL. You made the claim, it’s your job to prove it. So far you haven’t even tried. The fact that you don’t even try will be used as evidence of your bad faith. Sorry. People really wanting to fight those deep, dark forces don’t deliberately discredit themselves for no reason.
“and shut up forever. No more bullshit from you.”
This is evidence of his bad faith right here. No honest person would be angry that he’d been asked to provide some justification for a serious accusation. The fact that he expects us to just accept it on faith and is angry that we want more proves that this isn’t really a serious charge.
How is it Topalov’s friends always seem to do him more harm than good?
>>How convenient. A page of Cyrillic text, totally unreadable to an English speaker.
The Cyrillic text doesn’t make it less true. How should I know you are an English speaker? From your zeal in defending Kramnik, I gather that you are a former KGB agent.
>>
It seems so only to you because you are blinded by your bias.
>>
Asking you to present evidence for your own claims is bias! LOL, that’s hilarious!
Arguing dishonestly not only doesn’t help Topalov, it actually hurts him. It might make you feel better, but it won’t help him. The ACP has denounced his camp as a disgrace to the game, and that fact isn’t going to go away because some anonymous guy claims the existence of evidence he can’t show, and gets really mad when anyone ask to see it. (LOL) It wouldn’t help Topalov even if it existed, he’d still have violated FIDE Ethics rules by making a public accusation. Look it up. He’s guilty no matter what.
As for whether Kramnik is guilty too, I think we should just defer to Susan herself on that. If there were clear evidence that Kramnik had cheated, she wouldn’t withhold it. She might not want to take sides on personality issues, but she wouldn’t suppress actual facts just because they made someone look bad. Obviously there is no such evidence.
Ok, as far as I canread bulgarian – it’s a data cable to the Kram’s WC.
But it proves nothing.
And “Trud” was never the most serious newpaper. Neither Russian, nor bulgarian.
Pocket Fritz or mobile phone with a GPRS client would not do it.
As I heard there was not net coverage there.
But again. We see a hairy hand and some wire. Trud is more serious than Sun, but not much more.
Gentlemen, please cool off.
Again, this is what I wrote:
“Kasparov could never substantiate his accusations that the IBM team cheated (just as Topalov couldn’t substantiate the bathroom cheating accusations).”
I didn’t say Kramnik didn’t cheat. I said Topalov couldn’t substantiate the accusation. That’s all. So, as far as the world will know from here until eternity, that Kramnik defeated Topalov in 2006 in Elista. After “they left the building” (literally) it became totally irrelevant whether Kramnik cheated or not.
As for the Topalov fans I recommend that they should pull for his future games and matches. He didn’t do particularly well in the round robin tournament following the Kramnik match. In fact, if he would have won the Kramnik match, for a world champion it would have been a shame, sort of (not any less however, than Kramnik’s mate in one issue against Fritz).
So, cool off, be realistic, enjoy chess.
Gabor
>>
But again. We see a hairy hand and some wire. Trud is more serious than Sun, but not much more.
>>
Yes, but again, does Trud claim that anything is proved? Our over-excitable anonymous poster assured us that this article would settle the matter once and for all, but so far nothing you’ve said tells me that it even claims to do that.
>>I didn’t say Kramnik didn’t cheat. I said Topalov couldn’t substantiate the accusation.>>
And the accusation itself was a violation of FIDE Ethics Rules, specifically Rule 2.2.9, which prohibits public accusations against fellow players or event sponsors.
Kramnik may or may not be guilty of a rules violation, but Topalov most definitely is, which is why the ACP denounced his camp only.
>>After “they left the building” (literally) it became totally irrelevant whether Kramnik cheated or not.>>
The truth is always relevant. If at some time proof of this charge ever does arise, then it will matter, and it would be worse than Topalov’s crime. Without it though, there’s nothing. Topalov’s guilty, Kramnik isn’t, until the day that that proof is shown.
>>In fact, if he would have won the Kramnik match, for a world champion it would have been a shame, sort of (not any less however, than Kramnik’s mate in one issue against Fritz).>>
A shame, but not unprecedented. Petrosian played in Santa Monica coming right off of beating Spassky, and he was a bit flat in that tournament too. It happens. Probably neither Essent nor this match should have been played this soon after Elista, but I believe this match was scheduled before the Elista date was set. Not sure about Essent.
I have now watched all 3 games and I do not play 1.d4 so I find the games a bit technical and detailed. I feel strongly that kramnik has shown he is better at chess than the computer but he is human and made one mistake so far. hopefully he can win a game and tie up the match.
This match is much more fair than the IBM Kaspy match. That was much more of a psychological match where the IBM team just knew they were not that good and played Psychological games to defeat the computer. Kramnik is playing a style that has the best chance of winning. Even the last little combination today showed a glaring weakness in the computer. RxB then B check to get the “a” pawn and an absolute draw for sure.
Kasparov was simply not prepared for playing a strong computer. And he was especially not expecting the unfair psychological games that IBM was set to play.
I find the painting Ms. Polgar put up to illustrate this topic quite beautiful. Where does it come from? Who’s the artiste?
Considering I was only 11 and had a hard time remembering the rules of chess at that time, I’ll have to go on my feelings towards both matches now instead of at the time. 😛
The two key differences to me in this match are that…
#1 Unlike Deep Blue – Kasparov match, I want the human player to win. For the 95 match I was glad for a Deep Blue win because I wanted to know that it was possible for a computer to beat the best human player. I guess it gives me hope for having a robot butler by the time I’m 40. In this match however I want to know it’s still possible for a human to beat the world’s best computer. So I guess as far as the outcome I care a bit more about this one.
#2 That Fritz can be bought and played by anyone. This isn’t some monster computer designed only to play chess. Something about that endears me to the match. We’ve finally entered the age where the chessmasters have to eat at the same computer playing tables as the rest of us. 🙂
That being said, after it’s all said and done I’m sure I will still consider Kasparov’s bout with Deep Blue the longer lasting and much more important of the two, and will certainly go over it much more then Kramnik’s. Unless maybe Kramnik pulls out a spectacular comeback win…
Kasparov deep blue was a cover story for time and the new york times. Kramnik deep fritz takes searching the classifieds of parade magazine with a really big magnifying glass to see.
Considering that kramnik doesnt compare to garry in playing strength (never did) i dont see why anybody follows it. This is the 2nd best playing the 2nd best computer.
Deep Blue was (10 years ago!!!) much stronger in understanding. Positionally i mean. It calculated slower, but was much ‘smarter’ !!
…Bxh2+ eg !!
>>Considering that kramnik doesnt compare to garry in playing strength (never did) i dont see why anybody follows it. This is the 2nd best playing the 2nd best computer.
>>
LOL, and of course you and only you know exactly how strong Kasparov is 2 years after his last game. Man, the internet really brings the megalomania out of people.
“Considering that kramnik doesnt compare to garry in playing strength (never did) i dont see why anybody follows it.”
Kramnik beat Kasparov in a world title match and became the world champion.
Kramnik has an overall positive score against Garry.
“Trud” is the most central Bulgarian newspaper. The journalists there are liable to court suits against them unlike those in the yellow press. This photo was published in the newspaper together with a photo of an official protocol signed by Bovaev, Makropuolos, and three other officials stating that this picture is from the tiled ceiling of Kramnik’s bathroom and taken on Oct. 1, 2006.
I see that evidence ceases to be an evidence when it is for Topalov against Kramnik.
>>After “they left the building” (literally) it became totally irrelevant whether Kramnik cheated or not.
Whether Kramnik cheated or not is relevant in any circumstances irrespective of the fact whether someone has left the building or still is in there.
>>It was impossible to be able to tell even that much without reading Bulgarian.
Well, learn languages, educate yourself.
>>Looks like ordinary electrical wiring. Certainly nothing you’d need in order to operate a Pocket Fritz.
No, it looks like UTP-5 cable, the kind you’ll see in any internet cafe. It goes under the ceiling tiles. At the end it has a connection for linking a PDA.
>>He[Topalov]’s guilty no matter what.
I agree. Topalov is guilty for being robbed of the WC title by a cheater no matter what evidence there is for that.