5

I have seen a lot of debate about who is better between Carlsen and Kasparov.

Could a match between Carlsen and the exact same Deep Blue configuration that beat Kasparov be used to settle this?

  • 4
    Interesting idea. Would you allow Deep Blue's opening book to be freshened up? If not, Carlsen could exploit this. If so, the GMs are not playing the same opponent. And do you posit that they can each play a computer with the same skill they play humans? – Tony Ennis Dec 4 '16 at 15:46
  • What if Carlsen's openings were limited to the theory available for Kasparov? I'm not sure how possible this would be but it could be a way to deal with the issue. As for your second question, I did not think of this. I guess I was assuming it to be the case. Good point. I remember reading that Kasparov specifically tried to play in an anti-computer way rather than normal? – jjones Dec 5 '16 at 6:36
  • VTC because off topic (don't ask “What if ______ happened?” type questions please) – user1108 Dec 6 '16 at 14:50
  • I don't think this is a 'what if x happened?' type question. – jjones Dec 6 '16 at 18:57
  • Kasparov lost because he screwed the last game. He played above or at the same level as DB. Carlsen would win against that DB, just my opinion, – Fernando Dec 8 '16 at 13:30
6

I'd say no. Playing against a human being is a lot different than playing computers. Here is an article (unfortunately, it is in Dutch) about a German player with a rating under 2100 who regularly beat the top chess programs, by playing strange openings and long-term sacrifices. This was a few years after the Kasparov - Deep Blue match.

| improve this answer | |
4

Deep blue was dismantled soon after playing Kasparov.

So, I guess, we will never know what would have happened. However, if it does happen, then I would favour Carlsen winning against the computer. At the time that the match against Kasparov was played, computers weren't really stronger than humans.

And to be honest, I think, Kasparov lost because of his usually attacking instincts and the fact that he played openings that he never usually played.(This was because, he feared the computer had access to his games and he wanted to take the computer out of theory known at that time.) Even then, Deep Blue barely managed to win when Kasparov fell into a known trap in the last game.

So, I would say if this hypothetical match did happen and Carlsen plays at his best, Carlsen would easily win against Deep Blue.

However, this does not mean that in the current times, humans would beat computers without odds. Deep Blue was far weaker than modern-day engines, say Stockfish or Komodo. If you want to see the strongest human chess player vs strongest engine and who will win, then, engines would reign supreme.

| improve this answer | |
  • But do you think this victory (if it happened) could be evidence in the debate on whether Carlsen is better than Kasparov? – jjones Dec 5 '16 at 6:48
  • 1
    @jjones I am afraid,no. Playing against humans is much different than playing against computers. And Kasparov didn't play at his best against Deep Blue. So, it doesn't mean if Carlsen wins a match, then he is better than Kasparov or vice versa. – Sid Dec 5 '16 at 12:13
  • In a recent interview Carlsen said he is not going to play any computer any time soon: youtube.com/watch?v=Drxz3PH9gJE. Also "However, if it does happen, then I would favour Carlsen winning against the computer": false; nowadays computers (even on your laptop) are (at full depth) way over any GM level (around ELO 3300 at max, although ELO comparisons for computers are to be taken in quotation marks), thus I wouldn't be so sure Carlsen (or any other) could win easily, he himself (minute 4:42) says "I wouldn't have any chance at all against the best computer". – gented Dec 19 '16 at 9:32
  • @GennaroTedesco I am afraid, you got me wrong. I said that Carlsen had a better chance of winning against Deep Blue not against any computer now. – Sid Dec 19 '16 at 10:04
2

Chess engines and hardware since Kasparov played Deep Blue continue to improve.

Recently (Dec 2016) Stockfish achieved a rating of 3478: http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/404/

Carlesen fares reasonably well against it (on a reasonably normal computer) though its a strong engine.

Carleson playing against Deep Blue also has a couple of advantages Kasparov didn't have. Carlesen himself can use computers to prepare to play a computer AND Deep Blue has now has games on record so can have its own play analyzed.

So a Carlesen/Deep Blue game would tell us little. More interesting would be a Carlesen game against a modern chess engine with less time restrictions per move on searches, and on optimized hardware beyond what you can get at home.

Even then advantage goes to machine (likely).

| improve this answer | |
1

I would say no.

In an interview with GM Illescas, who was on the IBM team, I remember that he said Kasparov complained Deep Blue was not designed to beat a GM, it was designed to specifically beat him.

As the question says with the exact same configuration, I would say no because Deep Blue didn't include Carlsen’s games in its database in 1996 for an obvious reason.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.