juve_leo
♡ 12 ( +1 | -1 ) Game 2Can be viewed on Chessgames.com with an annotated repeat of the game on hess.fm. Game 3 will be live at 10.00AM EST tommrrow.
tertsius
♡ 11 ( +1 | -1 ) Am I wrong?It is my understanding that this "computer" is programmed by a GM and that the response(s) can be humanly manipulated during play?
juve_leo
♡ 23 ( +1 | -1 ) All ComputersAre like this. Kasparov complained about human interference when he faced deep blue in 1997. Usually the programers step in if it is a draw situation because Hydra was not intended to find drawn positions
tertsius
♡ 21 ( +1 | -1 ) So I am correct tosurmise that the "Programmer's" monitor the machines output; moves and intervene and or program response(s) before hand or during the match? This has been the history of all previous human-computer matchs.
soikins
♡ 75 ( +1 | -1 ) terstsiusProgrammers do not interfere with computers decisions during play, only decisions they make are resignation and draw offer (when they see that computer doesn't make any progress). They do programm the opening book before the match and that is the only way "they program response(s) beforehand". This has been the case in all previos Human vs. Machine matches (the only exceptions might be the 18-19 th century "machines" Turk, Ajeb and Mephisto :) ).
It is well known that with computer intervenience computers are much stronger than without it. See, for example "Freestyle chess" matches on playchess.com -> www.chessbase.com
Schedule Game 1 Tues. 21 June 2005, 3 PM Hydra-Adams 1-0 Game 2 Wed. 22 June 2005, 3 PM Adams-Hydra 1/2-1/2 Game 3 Thurs. 23 June 2005, 3 PM Hydra-Adams 1-0 Game 4 Sat. 25 June 2005, 3 PM Adams-Hydra 0-1 Game 5 Sun. 26 June 2005, 3 PM Hydra-Adams 1-0 Game 6 Mon. 27 June 2005, 3 PM Adams-Hydra -
Score Michael Adams – Hydra: 0.5:4.5
More here: -> www.chessbase.com
Best wishes Cairo
cairo
♡ 103 ( +1 | -1 ) Final resultSad day for human...............
Adams trounced 5.5–0.5 by Hydra One of the most lop-sided matches in recent memory ended Monday with another loss, with the white pieces, by Britain's top GM, Michael Adams, to the 32-processor hardware-enhanced Hydra chess machine. In six games at regular time controls Adams had succeeded in achieving a single draw – in game two with a clever save in an essentially lost position. In the other five games he was essentially crushed by the machine.
Game 1 Tues. 21 June 2005, 3 PM Hydra-Adams 1-0 Game 2 Wed. 22 June 2005, 3 PM Adams-Hydra 1/2-1/2 Game 3 Thurs. 23 June 2005, 3 PM Hydra-Adams 1-0 Game 4 Sat. 25 June 2005, 3 PM Adams-Hydra 0-1 Game 5 Sun. 26 June 2005, 3 PM Hydra-Adams 1-0 Game 6 Mon. 27 June 2005, 3 PM Adams-Hydra 0-1
More here: -> www.chessbase.com
Best wishes Cairo
dokesa
♡ 17 ( +1 | -1 ) humanityI actually think it is a good day for humanity. We have successfully constructed a static algorithm that is more powerful in chess than the adaptive human mind.
fmgaijin
♡ 30 ( +1 | -1 ) Well . . .. . . since Hydra still hasn't beaten a strong CC GM yet (lost several matches) and can't beat Human + Commercial Program in the "Assisted" event AND isn't completely a static algorithm (still uses human-programmed book up through move 10), I'll withhold agreeing completely with dokesa!
cairo
♡ 19 ( +1 | -1 ) Youmade my day fmgaijin :-))
Best wishes Cairo
dokesa
♡ 55 ( +1 | -1 ) ActuallyA computer is a strict subset of computer plus human, so the computer alone can never be better unless the human makes a mistake. A human-programmed book is still part of the static algorithm. In addition to being equations, algorithms can also contain tables. Against Nickel, was Hydra given the same amount of time that Nickel had or was it pulled away for other projects over those six months? The only non-static part of the program is offering and accepting draws without three-move repetition.