Originally posted by Tengu
Getting back to the question (although the side-track was funny)
From what I remember Kasparov's two main gripes were:
1) The Deep Blue team refused to provide him with Deep Blue's thinking lines. He claimed that this validated his suspiciions that some of the moves were "too human" and that DB had had help to select the right move.
2) The Deep Blue t ...[text shortened]... B's programming AFTER the start of the match series. The didnt do that for the first match.
This is pretty much the gripe.
GK's assertion is that he didn't lose to a computer; he lost to...
- a supercomputer, plus...
- a team of on-site programmers with the ability to communicate with the machine and adjust on the fly, plus...
- a team of Grandmaster analysts allowed to sit in a sealed room, combine their thought processes, talk situations through, use an analysis board, AND have supercomputer-level calculation at hand to boost their decision making, plus...
- a corporation determined to see him lose to their machine no matter how much money they had to throw at the project, the support team, or the rulebook.
IBM destroyed the evidence, and then their stock went up sharply.
You be the judge.