Kasparov was in fact psychologically cheated in 1997

[bob]

I looked at that when it was first posted, a long while back. I have no idea what Rolf is talking about when he talks about Murray's answer to a question. Murray has always taken his time to formulate an answer before he starts to speak, something perhaps Rolf might try to emulate more. But there was nothing "hidden" in his comments that lends any credibility to the "Kasparov was cheated" chant. In fact, that specific question was asked ("was it a fair match?") and I thought Levy's answer was dead on. Deep Blue 2 completely surprised Kasparov and demoralized him in game two. But the most damaging part was done by Kasparov himself, when he resigned a drawn position. And then he was told by his advisors of all the analysis many of us did overnight to prove it was a draw. And that was the final nail in his coffin. He blew it. He knew he blew it. And it caused him to implode. That is hardly IBM's fault...

Can you hear me, Bob?

I am talking about a video from a conference in 2005 where Murray participated. Know what I mean? Video! Length something more than two hours. You go right into the middle of the video. When the audience had its questions. Then the exchange between the elderly looking man and Campbell. Telling! You can also read what I wrote aboutg it at the top of this thread. Everything what I wrote here in the thread is from the video. Bob, you must just take a look for yourself. Perhaps you had been in the audience yourself...

I looked at it when it first came out, as I said. I was asked to review it. I looked at at again yesterday to see if I had overlooked something. I had not. So again, I do not have any idea what you are talking about. Murray acts just like he _always_ has. He looked just like he did the last time I saw him, except about 10 years older. The "exchange" was simply a question from the guy and an answer from murray. Your imagination is supplying the rest.

Please also read carefully what Edwards wrote here couple of days ago. He showed all the justified charges that could be made and then he *broke together* with the unfogettable tune, 'but Kasparov should stop making unbased charges'.

Kasparov did two things during the match. The last was to make unfounded claims of cheating. No evidence has _ever_ been produced to suggest that DB didn't play axb5 (which was his main claim of intervention). In fact, at the time, more than one program agreed with the move depending on the search time allowed. That is old news, it was bogus, and was just an attempt to make an excuse. The first thing he did was to use faulty preparation, and then fall apart when it became obvious his preparation had not given him any usable information with respect to deep blue.

this is all old... and well-known... The human intervention idea is simply a complete fabrication that continues to be put forward by people such as yourself, with absolutely _zero_ to support the claim. You do so because you know it can never be proven, so it gives you something to waste your time on...

[bob]

Please also read carefully what Edwards wrote here couple of days ago. He showed all the justified charges that could be made and then he *broke together* with the unfogettable tune, 'but Kasparov should stop making unbased charges'.

Get a clue, Rolf. None of IBM's behavior good or bad justified Kasparov's baseless allegations of cheating; and I have never claimed otherwise.

Considering the big haul of cash that Kasparov claimed in both events, I'd say he was treated rather well overall. For a week of sweat, he got more than most engineers make in a decade.

You are right, but I doubt that Kasparov did it all for the money in that match. He was defending human race. You just dont treat such a hero with disrespect. You are also right if you claim that nothing could be finally proven. But here I never had a different view after the year long training with Prof Bob.

Just for you in all due respect: is computer sciences science? What has it found out the last decades? What are you researching? Could you give an example in normal language?

Bullshit. He did it for the _money_. Nothing else. You need a reality check...

[Rolf]

Please also read carefully what Edwards wrote here couple of days ago. He showed all the justified charges that could be made and then he *broke together* with the unfogettable tune, 'but Kasparov should stop making unbased charges'.

Get a clue, Rolf. None of IBM's behavior good or bad justified Kasparov's baseless allegations of cheating; and I have never claimed otherwise.

Considering the big haul of cash that Kasparov claimed in both events, I'd say he was treated rather well overall. For a week of sweat, he got more than most engineers make in a decade.

You are right, but I doubt that Kasparov did it all for the money in that match. He was defending human race. You just dont treat such a hero with disrespect. You are also right if you claim that nothing could be finally proven. But here I never had a different view after the year long training with Prof Bob.

Just for you in all due respect: is computer sciences science? What has it found out the last decades? What are you researching? Could you give an example in normal language?

Bullshit. He did it for the _money_. Nothing else. You need a reality check...

How many realities do you know, Bob? It's like stats, one believes in the one you'd cheated yourself... that is how the saying goes. And now? You believe truly into the American reality, right?! However a whole World disagrees... with you.

[bob]

Please also read carefully what Edwards wrote here couple of days ago. He showed all the justified charges that could be made and then he *broke together* with the unfogettable tune, 'but Kasparov should stop making unbased charges'.

Get a clue, Rolf. None of IBM's behavior good or bad justified Kasparov's baseless allegations of cheating; and I have never claimed otherwise.

Considering the big haul of cash that Kasparov claimed in both events, I'd say he was treated rather well overall. For a week of sweat, he got more than most engineers make in a decade.

You are right, but I doubt that Kasparov did it all for the money in that match. He was defending human race. You just dont treat such a hero with disrespect. You are also right if you claim that nothing could be finally proven. But here I never had a different view after the year long training with Prof Bob.

Just for you in all due respect: is computer sciences science? What has it found out the last decades? What are you researching? Could you give an example in normal language?

Bullshit. He did it for the _money_. Nothing else. You need a reality check...

How many realities do you know, Bob? It's like stats, one believes in the one you'd cheated yourself... that is how the saying goes. And now? You believe truly into the American reality, right?! However a whole World disagrees... with you.

What does that rambling noise have to do with Kasparov's motive? He didn't play deep blue to "defend humanity against the silicon wave". He did it for $1,000,000.00, which is ten year's pay at a good job, earned in two weeks. It was about the money, and only the money. He thought it was going to be "easy money" from his 1996 experience. He was wrong.

[Rolf]

Please also read carefully what Edwards wrote here couple of days ago. He showed all the justified charges that could be made and then he *broke together* with the unfogettable tune, 'but Kasparov should stop making unbased charges'.

Get a clue, Rolf. None of IBM's behavior good or bad justified Kasparov's baseless allegations of cheating; and I have never claimed otherwise.

Considering the big haul of cash that Kasparov claimed in both events, I'd say he was treated rather well overall. For a week of sweat, he got more than most engineers make in a decade.

You are right, but I doubt that Kasparov did it all for the money in that match. He was defending human race. You just dont treat such a hero with disrespect. You are also right if you claim that nothing could be finally proven. But here I never had a different view after the year long training with Prof Bob.

Just for you in all due respect: is computer sciences science? What has it found out the last decades? What are you researching? Could you give an example in normal language?

Bullshit. He did it for the _money_. Nothing else. You need a reality check...

How many realities do you know, Bob? It's like stats, one believes in the one you'd cheated yourself... that is how the saying goes. And now? You believe truly into the American reality, right?! However a whole World disagrees... with you.

What does that rambling noise have to do with Kasparov's motive? He didn't play deep blue to "defend humanity against the silicon wave". He did it for $1,000,000.00, which is ten year's pay at a good job, earned in two weeks. It was about the money, and only the money. He thought it was going to be "easy money" from his 1996 experience. He was wrong.

Hi Rambo,
I forgot to mention that you are a computer scientist. You cant know therefore that Kasparov always wasnt just only a chessplayer but always also a politician. This is rare in his field. But continue to misbehave. You dont come from chess and its ethical background of gentleman's challenges. Yes, he was superstitious, but you have no right to rob him his human dignity only to cover up the impolite and cheating buddies.

[bob]

Please also read carefully what Edwards wrote here couple of days ago. He showed all the justified charges that could be made and then he *broke together* with the unfogettable tune, 'but Kasparov should stop making unbased charges'.

Get a clue, Rolf. None of IBM's behavior good or bad justified Kasparov's baseless allegations of cheating; and I have never claimed otherwise.

Considering the big haul of cash that Kasparov claimed in both events, I'd say he was treated rather well overall. For a week of sweat, he got more than most engineers make in a decade.

You are right, but I doubt that Kasparov did it all for the money in that match. He was defending human race. You just dont treat such a hero with disrespect. You are also right if you claim that nothing could be finally proven. But here I never had a different view after the year long training with Prof Bob.

Just for you in all due respect: is computer sciences science? What has it found out the last decades? What are you researching? Could you give an example in normal language?

Bullshit. He did it for the _money_. Nothing else. You need a reality check...

How many realities do you know, Bob? It's like stats, one believes in the one you'd cheated yourself... that is how the saying goes. And now? You believe truly into the American reality, right?! However a whole World disagrees... with you.

What does that rambling noise have to do with Kasparov's motive? He didn't play deep blue to "defend humanity against the silicon wave". He did it for $1,000,000.00, which is ten year's pay at a good job, earned in two weeks. It was about the money, and only the money. He thought it was going to be "easy money" from his 1996 experience. He was wrong.

Hi Rambo,
I forgot to mention that you are a computer scientist. You cant know therefore that Kasparov always wasnt just only a chessplayer but always also a politician. This is rare in his field. But continue to misbehave. You dont come from chess and its ethical background of gentleman's challenges. Yes, he was superstitious, but you have no right to rob him his human dignity only to cover up the impolite and cheating buddies.

I haven't robbed Kasparov of anything. He stood up on a public stage and acted like a complete jackass. He did a superb job of robbing himself of any dignity he might have had. Didn't need any help from _anyone_ to shred whatever dignity he had left, thank you...

You want to turn every conversation into a discussion with a twisted mind. I'm not biting. I'm not going to try to guess what he was thinking, I don't care. I'm not gong to try to guess what he was feeling, I don't care. It _really_ is that simple...

[Rolf]

Please also read carefully what Edwards wrote here couple of days ago. He showed all the justified charges that could be made and then he *broke together* with the unfogettable tune, 'but Kasparov should stop making unbased charges'.

Get a clue, Rolf. None of IBM's behavior good or bad justified Kasparov's baseless allegations of cheating; and I have never claimed otherwise.

Considering the big haul of cash that Kasparov claimed in both events, I'd say he was treated rather well overall. For a week of sweat, he got more than most engineers make in a decade.

You are right, but I doubt that Kasparov did it all for the money in that match. He was defending human race. You just dont treat such a hero with disrespect. You are also right if you claim that nothing could be finally proven. But here I never had a different view after the year long training with Prof Bob.

Just for you in all due respect: is computer sciences science? What has it found out the last decades? What are you researching? Could you give an example in normal language?

Bullshit. He did it for the _money_. Nothing else. You need a reality check...

How many realities do you know, Bob? It's like stats, one believes in the one you'd cheated yourself... that is how the saying goes. And now? You believe truly into the American reality, right?! However a whole World disagrees... with you.

What does that rambling noise have to do with Kasparov's motive? He didn't play deep blue to "defend humanity against the silicon wave". He did it for $1,000,000.00, which is ten year's pay at a good job, earned in two weeks. It was about the money, and only the money. He thought it was going to be "easy money" from his 1996 experience. He was wrong.

Hi Rambo,
I forgot to mention that you are a computer scientist. You cant know therefore that Kasparov always wasnt just only a chessplayer but always also a politician. This is rare in his field. But continue to misbehave. You dont come from chess and its ethical background of gentleman's challenges. Yes, he was superstitious, but you have no right to rob him his human dignity only to cover up the impolite and cheating buddies.

I haven't robbed Kasparov of anything. He stood up on a public stage and acted like a complete jackass. He did a superb job of robbing himself of any dignity he might have had. Didn't need any help from _anyone_ to shred whatever dignity he had left, thank you...

You want to turn every conversation into a discussion with a twisted mind. I'm not biting. I'm not going to try to guess what he was thinking, I don't care. I'm not gong to try to guess what he was feeling, I don't care. It _really_ is that simple...

Bob, this is the first time that you admit that you are incapable of doing something specific. Psychology. But still you know exactly, please dont take this as a form of insult, that your friends of the IBM team didnt cheat in expectence of such a huge money Prize in case they could bust Kasparov. How's that? Providence? Military discipline plus brainwashing?

Perhaps you would also defend the Bush administrations I and II that they didnt cheat the people with their Iraq war tales.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Please also read carefully what Edwards wrote here couple of days ago. He showed all the justified charges that could be made and then he *broke together* with the unfogettable tune, 'but Kasparov should stop making unbased charges'.

Get a clue, Rolf. None of IBM's behavior good or bad justified Kasparov's baseless allegations of cheating; and I have never claimed otherwise.

Considering the big haul of cash that Kasparov claimed in both events, I'd say he was treated rather well overall. For a week of sweat, he got more than most engineers make in a decade.

You are right, but I doubt that Kasparov did it all for the money in that match. He was defending human race. You just dont treat such a hero with disrespect. You are also right if you claim that nothing could be finally proven. But here I never had a different view after the year long training with Prof Bob.

Just for you in all due respect: is computer sciences science? What has it found out the last decades? What are you researching? Could you give an example in normal language?

Bullshit. He did it for the _money_. Nothing else. You need a reality check...

How many realities do you know, Bob? It's like stats, one believes in the one you'd cheated yourself... that is how the saying goes. And now? You believe truly into the American reality, right?! However a whole World disagrees... with you.

What does that rambling noise have to do with Kasparov's motive? He didn't play deep blue to "defend humanity against the silicon wave". He did it for $1,000,000.00, which is ten year's pay at a good job, earned in two weeks. It was about the money, and only the money. He thought it was going to be "easy money" from his 1996 experience. He was wrong.

Hi Rambo,
I forgot to mention that you are a computer scientist. You cant know therefore that Kasparov always wasnt just only a chessplayer but always also a politician. This is rare in his field. But continue to misbehave. You dont come from chess and its ethical background of gentleman's challenges. Yes, he was superstitious, but you have no right to rob him his human dignity only to cover up the impolite and cheating buddies.

I haven't robbed Kasparov of anything. He stood up on a public stage and acted like a complete jackass. He did a superb job of robbing himself of any dignity he might have had. Didn't need any help from _anyone_ to shred whatever dignity he had left, thank you...

You want to turn every conversation into a discussion with a twisted mind. I'm not biting. I'm not going to try to guess what he was thinking, I don't care. I'm not gong to try to guess what he was feeling, I don't care. It _really_ is that simple...

Bob, this is the first time that you admit that you are incapable of doing something specific. Psychology. But still you know exactly, please dont take this as a form of insult, that your friends of the IBM team didnt cheat in expectence of such a huge money Prize in case they could bust Kasparov. How's that? Providence? Military discipline plus brainwashing?

Perhaps you would also defend the Bush administrations I and II that they didnt cheat the people with their Iraq war tales.

I must admit that this is a possibility,but again,no proof....
What I do know for sure that Kasparov played for the $,defending humanity is a total crap,I don't buy it....

[sje]

What I do know for sure that Kasparov played for the $,defending humanity is a total crap,I don't buy it....

Agreed. But I won't criticize Kasparov on the motivational aspect of pecuniary reward; I might have done the same thing if had chess talent of his level. But any rational motivations on his part, whatever they may have been, did not justify acting jerkishly towards his opponent/sponsor.

A much better strategy for Kasparov upon losing would have him graciously accept defeat, praise the skills of the DB team, and ask for a final rematch to establish a two out of three majority result.

[Rolf]

What I do know for sure that Kasparov played for the $,defending humanity is a total crap,I don't buy it....

Agreed. But I won't criticize Kasparov on the motivational aspect of pecuniary reward; I might have done the same thing if had chess talent of his level. But any rational motivations on his part, whatever they may have been, did not justify acting jerkishly towards his opponent/sponsor.

A much better strategy for Kasparov upon losing would have him graciously accept defeat, praise the skills of the DB team, and ask for a final rematch to establish a two out of three majority result.

Isnt there a rule in computer sciences that determines a cause-effect linkage in a logical manner? It's always breath-taking to watch how seemingly smart experts dont hesitate to conclude from effects on the cause as the alleged fantazised and excused consequence. As if their computational habits would allow them to order a turn-around of directions which had been well defined for ages in our civilization.

To set the record straight, it was Kasparov who asked for the output in a game that was interrupted and when afterwards suddenly the machine played like a human chess GM. No matter what the psychological state of Kasparov might have been, the operators of that event should have treated Kasparov with respect, out of genuine reasons because he's the best human player and then also because any disruption in the process of the show would destroy the value of the challenge, simply because the human player can only play his best chess in peaceful atmospheres. So, the IBM guys had no other choice as to negotiate the whole problem, but they prefered to do it in the known American Rambo-like mentality. Brute Force. Not sophisticated, uncivilized. - The rest was simply the human player play to the end in disgust and take the money. He was so deeply disgusted, that he did no longer want to win anything against that emptiness all cultural virtues. - Actually he just takes the money from Americans who believe they could use his political ideas for ironically again military anti-Russian CIA plans. See the turmoil in Georgia and the pushing NATO towards the Russian borders. But that's a new topic.