Posted By: Koles (nikam nejdu) on 'CZchess' Title: zaznam z posledniho dne zapasu :) Date: Tue May 13 17:58:12 1997 varovani: tento prispevek je dlouhy :) obsahuje nejprvnejsi komentare k partii a rozhovor s Garrim Kasparovem. --- ROBERT J. T. MORRIS: Good afternoon. As you know, we're at the last and determining game of the Kasparov vs. Deep Blue match. Today promises to be very, very exciting. We can take as evidence what we've seen during the last few days. Now, before we get into the match, I would like to run a couple of minutes of scholarly discussions about parallel processing and how far it has come. Will you run the tape, please. "From New York -- do you want cream and sugar with that? -- it's the Late Show with David Letterman. YASSER SEIRAWAN: I love stuff like this. Over the weekend world chess champion Garry Kasparov was defeated by the IBM computer Deep Blue. Deep Blue defeated Garry Kasparov. In a related story earlier today the New York Mets were defeated by a microwave oven. Letterman: This computer Deep Blue is a very, very intelligent machine. This machine, to give you an idea of how smart it is, it has the good sense not to pick up a drag queen on Santa Monica Boulevard! So far, ladies and gentlemen, this is the very best rehearsal we've ever had. "It's the Late Show with David Letterman. Letterman: Garry Kasparov, the world chess champion is playing a computer, programmed to make 200 million chess moves a second. And I believe the series is one win apiece and one draw, and it's the best of, I don't know, what is it, Paul, 18, 20, 24? Best of six? Whoever wins the most after six games? Or are you just making up a number? But any ways, I've been reading a little bit about this computer. They're calling it Deep Blue. Not only does it play chess. This is an amazing piece of modern technology. Look, we have some tape. Look at what else the computer does, in addition to playing chess. (Picture of computer with a ping-pong paddle.) (Picture of a computer driving a sled dog team.) (Picture of a computer vaulting a high jump.) "From NBC studios in Burbank, the Tonight Show with Jayleno!" Len owe: Over the weekend, Garry Kasparov playing chess matches against the IBM supercomputer. We were at the bar knocking down brewskies, shouting, guys are going nuts watching this chess match against the computer. I guess Kasparov won the first match and then the computer won the first game. Kasparov did not take it well. Did you see today how he reacted? I thought this was bad sportsman ship. Here he is playing the computer. There's the other man representing the computer here. Now, watch when he loses. "Check" watch what Kasparov does here? (Shows man unplugging cord.) (Audience laughter.) Len owe: I just hope that brings closure to this! (Audience laughter.) "From the NBC studios in Burbank, the Tonight Show with Jay Len owe." Len owe: And world class chess champion Garry Kasparov playing the IBM computer Deep Blue in game three today of their best-of-seven match. Deep Blue, that's an odd name for a computer. Sounds more like some Smurf porn star, doesn't it? I guess today was a tie. I guess Kasparov won, right, then he lost, and today was a tie. We've been glued to the TV watching! The sitting with the guys, the chips, doesn't get any better than that. If you saw today, did you see what happened? Kasparov switched games on the computer. Very clever strategy. Show this. Look, Garry is playing. Show the game he switched. Look, they switched to Candyland! (Audience laughter.) People think Candyland is a piece of cake! "From the NBC studios in Burbank, the Tonight Show with Jay Len owe!" Leno: Chess champion Garry Kasparov says very impressive is the IBM Deep Blue computer. Have you been following this thing? Showing signs of actual intelligence. You know, why waste time building computers that can beat Grandmasters in chess? Why? Why doesn't IBM put some time and effort trying to make a computer that won't break down while you're in Sears trying to buy a package of underwear? (Audience applause.) (Audience laughter.) Have you been following this chess match? People just on the edge of their seats watching this! It's getting really intense. Did you see Kasparov today? It looked like it was getting to him. It looked like the pressure -- show the match. Show this clip from the match. There's Kasparov. (Fans yelling from the sideline, Kasparov in a grimace.) Once those fans start trash talking like that... ROBERT J. T. MORRIS: I would like to introduce to you Monty Newborn. Monty is the chairman of the ACM chess committee and Monty is overseeing the match. Monty? MONTY NEWBORN: On behalf of the ACM, the Association for Computing, it's my pleasure to be here and participate in this exciting event. This is going to make chess history. We're anticipating an incredibly exciting afternoon. We have the world champion with 2 1/2 points. We have the IBM chess program, Deep Blue, with 2 1/2 points. And we're about seven or eight minutes from starting this game, which will last about four to five hours. Perhaps at this time if anybody has to go to the bathroom, this is a good time. Nobody will leave once we begin. Not that you can't, but nobody will leave. We have three commentators that will bring this game to life in a way that won't be clear by the time it's finished whether it's a football game, a baseball game, or a chess match. I assure you, it's a chess match. Our first commentator is Mike Valvo. Mike? Mike has been the arbiter at the last match between Kasparov and Deep Blue in Philadelphia last year. He's an International Master. He's one of the toughest guys at playing chess with his eyes closed. He can play between ten and 15 and maybe as many as 20 people with his eyes closed, and beat most of them. MIKE VALVO: All these flowery words, and a few minutes ago he said that we were reduced to weather forecasters in that last game. MONTY NEWBORN: We were talking off stage, and this last game was such an incredibly complex game that it was my understanding that nobody quite understood the whole thing, although the commentators were pretty close, I'll give them credit. Our second commentator is Maurice Ashley. Maurice is an International Master. He's a New Yorker. He was a commentator at our last match. And he's the setup man in this combination. You watch how he sets up everybody on stage here. He's terrific. Our third commentator is Yasser Seirawan. Yasser has been the United States chess champion three times. He's been one of the top players in the United States for well over a decade now. He served as a commentator as well in the last match in Philadelphia, and I'm sure that he'll add the last dimension in chess expertise to this panel of outstanding chess players and commentators. I wish you all a very exciting afternoon and I'm going to turn the floor over to Maurice Ashley, who will continue and entertain you for the rest of the day. Maurice? MAURICE ASHLEY: Thank you, Monty. Welcome once again to game six, the final game of the Kasparov vs. Deep Blue Rematch. I don't know about you, but I'm excited, we're excited, the whole world is excited. And no plug-pulling will happen today, I can assure you. There's no tomorrow. MAURICE ASHLEY: There's no tomorrow. This is it. And Kasparov has it seems been rattled by what is going on here. All of us are amazed by how Deep Blue has played. The score is tied 1-1, that is in wins, and three draws. So the winner today takes it all home. And Kasparov today is Mother's Day, which I wish a happy Mother's Day to you all. Happy Mother's Day. Kasparov's mother Clara is here. We often watches Kasparov play, "here" meaning the Equitable Building. I would like to welcome those over the WebTV and the Internet who are watching. We are in the Equitable Building now, the auditorium. On the 35th floor, Kasparov is preparing to enter to play against Deep Blue, and operator Joe Hoane, I believe it is, is awaiting Kasparov's arrival. And about Kasparov's mother watching, there's got to be some pressure on Mother's Day, Yaz, knowing that her son is going into battle. And in addition to that pressure, Kasparov has set this whole thing up as he's defending mankind. Mankind against the ever-encroaching speed and complexity and problem solving ability of the computer. Well, true justice in the human race is enough pressure for Garry, Yaz. What do you think his chances are for today? YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, that's the 700-thousand-dollar question. That's the winner's purse. And quite frankly, Clara, Garry's mom, is nervous not only for herself and her son but it seems for just about everybody on the whole team. I'm nervous with her. Before the match I thought Garry was going to win very easily. I really thought that the computer hadn't made as much progress as it has, and, I don't know, but I have a gut instinct that Garry is going to win it. A real gut instinct. But he has put himself under a lot of, lot of pressure, playing the black pieces in the final game. He's only one once against the computer in 11 tries -- actually not in 11 tries -- but when he was black, he only managed to beat the computer once in the whole series of games. And by the way, Garry does appear to be late, and I don't know if it's a psychological ploy -- (Audience laughter.) MAURICE ASHLEY: That ain't going to work with this thing. Mike, are you as stunned as everybody else as how well Deep Blue is doing? And before you answer, Garry Kasparov has seated himself at the table. Are you stunned that he is taking his watch off preparing for battle? Are you amazed that Deep Blue has done this well. MIKE VALVO: I'm amazed and I think the computer has taught us new ways to do some things, too. It's just incredible how it drew that game. It just came out of nowhere. MAURICE ASHLEY: "That game" meaning yesterday's game? MIKE VALVO: Out of the blue -- a bolt out of the blue! That was supposed to be a joke. YASSER SEIRAWAN: A bolt out of the blue. MAURICE ASHLEY: Kasparov here you see readying himself. The press has been tremendous this match, and there are several press members here on the 35th floor. They also have a press room on the 49th floor covering the match -- MIKE VALVO: 50th floor now. MAURICE ASHLEY: 50th floor now. Hundreds of journalists. From just all over. This match has taken on epic proportions and this game will decide it all, Kasparov readying himself. The last game Kasparov had, Yaz, he had a good position, he had some strong winning chances. Do we expect to see some of what happened in the last game? YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, Garry has been playing what I would best describe as second-rate openings. He seems to be quite cautious or is simply afraid of the preparation that Deep Blue and his team, and it seems to me that there was a whole group of Grandmasters helping Deep Blue, and so he's played some second rate openings, not his first lines of defense. We are expecting e2-e4. DB MOVE: 1 e4 MAURICE ASHLEY: And in fact the first move of this epic first game has been played. Deep Blue has played e2-e4. GK MOVE: 1...c6 DB MOVE: 2 d4 MAURICE ASHLEY: He has repeated the move c7-c6 which caused Yaz to grown because usually he plays c7-c5. Deep Blue has prepared and played d2-d4. GK MOVE: 2...d5 DB MOVE: 3 Nc3 MAURICE ASHLEY: This move d5 is in fact different from what he had done in game four. Kasparov had played d7-d6, a bit more cagey, a bit more cautious, and now he's going into what looks like a Caro-Kann. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Exactly. The first two moves for Garry, c6 and d5, it's an opening I play all the time, in fact. What we saw in game 4 was not the move d7-d5, this really obscure unusual move d7-d6. And like I said, Garry got a good game in that particular game. But, again, it's not first-line openings by Garry Kasparov. Now this move d7-d5. And let me just talk about this for a moment. Garry Kasparov is not a Caro-Kann player. The Caro-Kann is an opening that is very quiet, that is to say it's a very positional-based opening. Tactics usually come much later in the game and it's very often that in a Caro-Kann style of play, the whole game is a strategic, positional game. I had hoped as you saw me, I tried to make a prediction that Garry is going to play his favorite Sicilian, c7-c5, which he didn't do. So I don't know what Garry was expecting with the Caro-Kann. GK MOVE: 3...dxe4 MAURICE ASHLEY: Kasparov has captured, which is the most frequent move in this position. DB MOVE: 4 Nxd4 MAURICE ASHLEY: Deep Blue has responded instantly by playing Nxe4, and now Kasparov -- GK MOVE: 4...Nd7 MAURICE ASHLEY: That's a move that aze arch-rival Anatoly Karpov often plays. Mike, Kasparov has not played one opening that we would call a real opening, a dip cal Kasparov opening. DB MOVE: 5 Ng5 MIKE VALVO: By the way, Garry has played the Caro-Kann before. I have seen some games that he has played. So it's not totally new to him. It's very interesting that he is playing this line because this could be a very complicated line, very topical. So the computer is going to have a lot of what we call book moves, a lot of storeed positions. This is the most topical thing in the Caro-Kann today, this particular line. So the computer could play quickly for the next 15 moves. MAURICE ASHLEY: Well, Yaz, this last move, Ne4-g5, to many beginners' eyes, we know the principle don't move a piece twice in the opening if you don't have to. And here this knight has moved from e4 to g5 it seems without any provocation. Why don't you explain to us why this is. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Do I have to? (Audience laughter.) MAURICE ASHLEY: You're the Grandmaster. YASSER SEIRAWAN: I don't want to reveal any of my secrets now. No, chess theory has evolved over a long, long, long period of time. And this move Ne4-g5 has been played after thousands and thousands of previous games where they played Nf3, Bc4, Qe2, and other such moves. But the idea of the move knight g5, in principle, is to create an early attack against the f7 square, forcing black to play e7-e6, and then the knight usually tries to gain control of the e5 square. It's become a favorite weapon, and especially in the mid-eighties it was played almost constantly for white. As you mentioned, Anatoly Karpov is a great defender of the Caro-Kann position, a very illustrious career with the black pieces, and I think it very likely that we will see one of those openings that are analyzed out for 15 or 20 moves, because it's going to be now very hard for Kasparov to avoid those lines. In these types of positions, you don't want to play anything original, because you could get into a lot of trouble early. I think that he's going to play one of the main lines and be satisfied with the resulting position. MAURICE ASHLEY: But isn't this the kind of position that often tends to a draw? A lot of people say the Caro-Kann is a drawish opening. If you want to win, you've got to play something sharp like the Sicilian. Does he want to draw today, Mike? Is Kasparov happy with a draw today and result in a drawn match? MIKE VALVO: Obviously he's not going to be happy, but he doesn't want to lose, either! (Audience laughter.) So he's going to play a nice, solid opening. He's noticed by now that he's doing the best in the endgame against this machine, although the machine seems to be getting away at the last moment every time. He still is doing better in the endgame than any other phase of the game. Yesterday he did well in the beginning, then the computer really fought back hard and, gosh, it looked like the computer was getting an edge, and we went into an endgame, and it looked like Garry was just creaming the computer, going to queen a pawn, and all of the sudden they agreed to a draw right in front of our eyes. Nonetheless the endgame offers the best chances for Garry and that's where he's heading. He's hoping to steer through a middle game, beat back the attack that Deep Thought -- Deep Blue -- used to be Deep Thought -- that Deep Blue is presenting in front of it, and hoping for the endgame. So we may have a very clear-cut, easy-to-follow kind of game, and that's what the audience seems to appreciate. There was one game, I think it was game four, where everybody followed from beginning toned the whole game and I suspect this will be an easy game to follow, very strategic in nature, simple. It will be Yasser's kind of game, he likes this kind of game, he's going to enjoy it, he's going to say yes, the Caro-Kann is vindicated, but the rest of us know it can't be true. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Thanks for that set up. Let me just say on behalf of myself and other Caro-Kann players, yes, in general we take the perspective that white with the opening move has the opportunity of building up an advantage. So the Caro-Kann really is an equalizing weapon. But it doesn't necessarily mean that just because I play the Caro-Kann I'm playing for a draw. The Caro-Kann is a very solid setup for black and if white overpresses, he easily ends up a victim. GK MOVE: 5...Ngf6 MAURICE ASHLEY: Kasparov has in fact moved, playing his knight on g8 to f6. MIKE VALVO: You know, it's interesting. People may be wondering -- DB MOVE: 6 Bd3 MIKE VALVO: -- why Garry is taking so long to make almost forced moves. Why do you think this is the case, Yasser? YASSER SEIRAWAN: In this particular situation the opening is now become established. He was unsure of what Deep Blue was going to play on the third move. Deep Blue had lots of choices, the advanced Caro, the Panov Botvinnik, with the exchange of pawns on d5. So he wasn't absolutely sure he was going to get this position. He's now got the position. And he's preparing himself for the kind of battle that we've been talking about, a strategic battle. MAURICE ASHLEY: After Ngf6 Deep Blue has responded instantly with Bf1-d3, developing the bishop, putting it on a very solid square. Potentially Kasparov might castle king-side, so the bishop is well placed for that. GK MOVE: 6...e6 MAURICE ASHLEY: Opening a line for his bishop. And again Deep Blue is clearly in its opening book because it is playing very quickly. DB MOVE: N1 f3 MAURICE ASHLEY: Kasparov trying to get his bishop quickly into the action, we anticipate the bishop on f8 moving shortly. We would like to note that those who are following this over the Internet. Some who are unable to follow live but must follow using a web server or just follow using a chessboard. So we will try to be as visual as possible, be your eyes and ears, so to speak, because they're just following it in the written text. At the moment, then, we should say to our left we are in an auditorium in the Equitable Building. To our left is a video screen that shows the current position at all times. Behind us is a Fritz 4 computer playing program, very strong, and it has helped us to do the analysis over time and I guess to sort of understand Deep Blue in a way. But we find that Deep Blue is a bit biased in its opinion. MIKE VALVO: Not today, it likes black better. MAURICE ASHLEY: Today it's liking black. We will explain what these mean, some bar graphs and evaluations that we will explain shortly. And to our right is another video screen showing Kasparov and a variety of things including the Deep Blue team, the audience, a number of things at different times. So, back to the game position -- GK MOVE: 7...h6 MAURICE ASHLEY: Instead of bringing out his bishop with Bd6, Kasparov has instead -- DB MOVE: 8 Nxe6 MAURICE ASHLEY: Capturing on e6 instantly and Kasparov shook his head for a moment -- GK MOVE: 8...Qe7 DB MOVE: 900. GK MOVE: ...fxe6 DB MOVE: Bg6+. GK MOVE: ...Kd8 MAURICE ASHLEY: Kasparov is shaking his head as if something disastrous has happened, his king being chased around the board. Is it possible that Kasparov has played incorrect theoretically? YASSER SEIRAWAN: Yes, he has. He blunered. What he did is he transposed moves. What I mean by that is this position is quite well known, and you had witnessed me playing the move Bf8-d6. The idea being that after Bd6, it's standard for white to then play Qe2, and then after h6, this sacrifice Nxe6 doesn't work because black has the move Kf8 later. MAURICE ASHLEY: You mean after Nxe6? YASSER SEIRAWAN: Capturing the knight, there's the check, the king can go to f8. But playing h6 one move earlier, the sacrifice that we've now seen, h6, is possible. As far as I recall, there was a famous game between Granda Zuniga, Grandmaster from Peru, vs. our very own Patrick Wolff. And it was a very difficult game for black to play and it became recognized that the move h6 was wrong. And Gary, assist -- Garry, as you saw his reactions, the moment that Deep Blue played Nxe6 so very quickly and reached the position they now have on the board, he was in just terror, distress. Because he's -- he recognizes that he's fallen for a well-known opening trap. MAURICE ASHLEY: Is this over? Is it that simple? MIKE VALVO: No. MAURICE ASHLEY: I mean he's up a piece for a pawn. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Right. MAURICE ASHLEY: His king is in a sorry state right now on the d8 square, to be sure. Is it just over? I remember another game between wolf and Epishin in the same line, and I believe it was somewhat difficult to just press on the attack necessarily. I know it's a strong position for white, it looks like a dangerous position, and a lot of players would be licking their chops to have a position like this against Kasparov with his king so disgusting on d8. (Audience laughter.) But I mean a piece is a piece after aall -- after all and maybe he can work his way out and not only that, one thing I'm intrigued by is Deep Blue, in what is a so-called trappy line, standard opening trap programmed into it, did not play instantly but spent a lot of time before finally deciding to play this move. DB MOVE: 11 Bf4 MAURICE ASHLEY: This traps the king on the d8 square. Now the king cannot move and Kasparov immediately has to defend. Kasparov cannot be a happy man, Mike. He played an opening that is normally not his mixier, and now he's going to have to suffer fo who knows how many moves. MIKE VALVO: I don't remember Bf4 being a correct move in that position. YASSER SEIRAWAN: In fact, I believe it is. The idea is the bishop on g6 is a very powerful bishop because it ties down black's ability to develop his king-side. If black had the chance, he would love to play the move g7-g5 and then Bg7. What white has done is sacrificed a piece for a long-term initiative. Okay, what I mean by that is the initiative means the ability to make threats. Deep Blue has an ideal attacking formation, quick development, the king is safe. Black has all kinds of problems. How is he going to develop his army? The idea of the move Bf4 is, if we go back for a moment and we consider another possible idea for white, is what Garry would like to do is play Nf6-d5, followed by Qe7-f6, getting out of the way of the bishop on f8 and trying to get rid of that bishop on g6. So the idea of Bf4 is to immediate Nd5 with Bg3, when Qf6 is no longer possible because of Bh4, winning Garry's queen and the game. MAURICE ASHLEY: How is this possible, Yaz? I know we often try to play different openings to fool our opponents, but how could the "best by test" in the world, Garry Kasparov, make such an academic blunder? I'm trying to understand it. This guy's knowledge is encyclopedic, much less -- for him to play so basic and so wrong. YASSER SEIRAWAN: And indeed Garry spoke about that yesterday. He spoke about his memory as being one of the best chess memories in the world. One of the things that -- and in fact I find most upsetting about this particular position is, if Garry Kasparov were to lose today's game, it's entirely conceivable this whole sacrifice and so on is just in Deep Blue's library, opening library, and it's done nothing -- it may turn out it won't even have to play an original move if Garry chooses one of the variations that it has been programmed as a win for itself. Which would be very unfair, not only to the Deep Blue team and its research, but to Garry Kasparov as well, because all he's doing is losing to analysis by his own colleagues. MAURICE ASHLEY: To be fair, though, Garry did not have to choose an opening that he doesn't normally play. I know a friend of mine, whenever I go into a big competition, my mentor, fellow name Willie Johnson, always says, "Maurice, play what you know." And it's good advice. It's served me in good stead. You go into situations that you're familiar with, instead of going into something new and you don't know what's going on, you start thinking for a long time as Kasparov is now. He's shaking his head. He's perturbed already. Already, the game just started. We are only on move 11, and Kasparov can normally whip off 15 moves in a flash, we're on move 11, and he's suffering already for no good reason. MIKE VALVO: You know, and it's exactly the kind of position that he didn't want the computer to have. MAURICE ASHLEY: How so? MIKE VALVO: Wild, complicated, tactical. He just didn't want this. And I wouldn't say that Garry's forte is defensive chess. He's a good defender, but he's a much better attacker. MAURICE ASHLEY: Right. MIKE VALVO: And the thing that occurred to me is the two games where we had extended opening lines, game two and this game, in both cases he used Anatoly Karpov's lines, which is kind of strange. Why not just play c5, like Yasser said, play your own stuff, go with what got you there, as you say. YASSER SEIRAWAN: What brought you to the party. MIKE VALVO: That's what we came to see. We didn't come to see him trying to trick the computer. We came to see him take the computer head on, and I had hoped that he would do it in this final game, he would realize that up to now it hasn't work, this is the time he has to do it, he's pulled all his tricks, now let's go with our strengths, your strengths to my strength. MAURICE ASHLEY: Is he so terrified by Deep Blue and what it might know that it's just completely thrown him off his game? YASSER SEIRAWAN: It seems -- MIKE VALVO: It seems so. He said yesterday "I'm not afraid to say I'm afraid." You said are you going to play powerful in the last game, and he said, "I'll play the best moves that I can." MAURICE ASHLEY: Garry is known for his bravado -- GK MOVE: 11...b5 MAURICE ASHLEY: He's going to put me at a loss for words in a minute, and that's not easy to do. b7-b5 has been played. b7-b5, Yaz. MIKE VALVO: Could we see the computer's clock? I want to see if this has all been book. YASSER SEIRAWAN: I think the computer has played very quickly, -- MIKE VALVO: I was wondering if they were out of book. MAURICE ASHLEY: Deep Blue has used only six minutes to play 12 moves. Kasparov has used 15 minutes, but the time spent was really on only one move and that was the last move, b7-d5. Every other move he actually played quickly. But h6 took him a little time to play, a little time, and then suddenly the sacrifice, Nxe6? A. This mover, Yaz, b7-b5, what's this about? Seems to me to develop -- he should be wanting to develop pieces, not push pawns. YASSER SEIRAWAN: What Garry has to do obviously is develop his pieces. If you look at his army, the two bishops on the back row, the two rooks, the misplaced black king means that Garry has to make a great deal of repairs to his position. I had just put on the board the move Nd5 that comes with tempo. Then the idea was Bg3 Qe7-b4, trying to develop the queen, preparing the knight retreat Nb5-e7. He wants to make sure the knight when it comes to d5 stays there, and there will not be the move c2-c4. So what he did with this last move, b7-b5 is to try to secure the square d5 for his knight so that he won't have to worry about the move c2-c4. MAURICE ASHLEY: But, Yaz, can this position tolerate more pawn weaknesses? His king on D eight won't find a home for a very, very long time. Of course the point of the game is to checkmate the king and the best thing you can do is have pawns behind it. These pawns look suspicious as defenders of this king on d8. I don't even see how the king will ever get back to the king-side. This could be a long trek indeed. b7-b5 seems a little loose to be playing in this kind of situation. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, Garry's got problems, and -- (Audience laughter.) Garry does have problems in this position. The first thing he's got to do is address his development. He hopes that he's not going to get run over in the center and his king. For example, we could try to understand Garry's hopes after the move Ne5 by Deep Blue. In general it's a bad idea to trade attacking pieces for defending pieces, so the move Ne5 is an unlikely choice. It does, however, threaten Ne5xc6 checkmate. So that after Nxe5 again we would see an unlikely choice in dxe5. DB MOVE: 12 a4 MAURICE ASHLEY: Before that could even settle itself as a positional concept, Deep Blue has instantly moved, seeking to undermine the b5 pawn with the move a2-a4, and that pawn will have to make a decision sometime soon. GK MOVE: 12...Bb7 MAURICE ASHLEY: Instead Kasparov has left the pawn on that square and has moved quickly with Bc8-b7. And now Kasparov is moving a little bit quicker than one would suspect in such a dangerous situation, Yaz. Bc8-b7 was probably seen by Deep Blue in response to its a4 idea. I guess he's just settled down, I guess he's just figured, well, I made a mistake, got to live with it, let's play chess. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Exactly. In this case he's going to have to live with it, so he's already reconciled himself to that. The idea of a2-a4 is the struggle. White wants to knock the b5 pawn out of the way so that c2-c4 becomes a possibility. At the same time, the move a2-a4 will open up the rook on a1 into active service, and the rook will get drafted. MAURICE ASHLEY: It's interesting to me, though, Yaz, what's very interesting about this position is that, if we look first at Fritz, the way Fritz is looking at the position, Fritz says right now that black only has a .28 advantage, .28 of a pawn. Now, one point is one pawn, that's 1.00 is one pawn. Now, mathematically, what's been programmed into Deep Blue is that a knight is worth three pawns, 3.00 and a pawn is one point. Now simple subtraction, that means that right now, black has the advantage of two pawns. Now, we see the compensation immediately. The bad king, the developed pieces for white. We see that white has tremendous compensation and could work to try to win the position. But what if Deep Blue sees the material disadvantage and thinks, for example, "Maybe I can win the e6 pawn back and start to equalize material somewhat, and maybe just play like Qe2, gang up on the e-pawn, and if Kasparov gets Deep Blue to take this pawn, which is what Deep Blue might want to do considering it's down material, he might suddenly be winning the game. YASSER SEIRAWAN: How many of us think that? MAURICE ASHLEY: My point is this. What would prevent, Mike, maybe you can answer this question. What would prevent Deep Blue from seeing the e6 pawn and just taking it if Garry leaves it that so that it can get closetory redressing the material imbalance? After all this sacrifice it played was not played on its own, on its own volition, it was programmed in. Maybe by now Deep Blue is thinking when the new moves started on the board "Who sacked my knight?" (Audience laughter.) YASSER SEIRAWAN: Good point. DB MOVE: 13 Re1 MAURICE ASHLEY: Re1, eyeing a weakness. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Which is what with you just pointed out. Maybe he wants to play Qe2 to gang up on this -- MAURICE ASHLEY: In fact Qe2 in this position practically wins a pawn because it attacks the b5 pawn and the e6 pawn. That would actually show a flaw in Deep Blue. MIKE VALVO: I would like to address this. I think in game two we saw evidence of reasons why Deep Blue will not settle for just winning that pawn. Remember that it didn't play Qb6? YASSER SEIRAWAN: Correct. MIKE VALVO: It could have won two pawns but it didn't do so because its king would be exposed. Now, it's aware of the other guy's king being exposed, too, and it won't settle necessarily just to win a couple of pawns when the king's exposure is worth more to it. I don't think it'll settle for a couple of pawns. Most computers would. I don't think this machine will. MAURICE ASHLEY: Well, that would be disastrous indeed if that did occur and it would show a flaw in the computer's estimation and valuation of the position. MIKE VALVO: If it did. MAURICE ASHLEY: If it did. At the moment Deep Blue has played Re1. Kasparov is thinking about how to finish developing his pieces. It's a very tricky task indeed. We should say to our in-house audience that we love it for you to participate. We will be sending ushers around with microphones to ask several questions, and we will do our best to answer those questions. MIKE VALVO: Who is going to win? MAURICE ASHLEY: We would also just like before we do that to welcome some students who have been invited by IBM -- every day IBM has given tickets for students to come and watch the games, and we have people from everywhere. First, I would like to introduce the ridge way public school from White Plains, New York. We give them a plan. -- we give them a hand. Who's champ of Ridgeway? Who's the best player in ridge way? Two hands went up. Can we get a microphone over to the two youngsters? I see two hands, so I'm going to have to get two names. What's your name? AUDIENCE MEMBER: Oscar. MAURICE ASHLEY: And next to him is also the champion of ridge way? AUDIENCE MEMBER: And the nation. MAURICE ASHLEY: They are -- AUDIENCE MEMBER: National champions. MAURICE ASHLEY: They are national champions? (Audience applause.) Who do you think is going to win today? AUDIENCE MEMBER: Deep Blue. And Oscar, what do you think? AUDIENCE MEMBER: Kasparov. MAURICE ASHLEY: All right! Okay, we've got two sides here. All right, we would also like to welcome Port -- are they from Port Washington school district? Port Washington? We also have kids from all over the Port Washington area, not a particular school. We would like to welcome you for coming. And as a group, who thinks Kasparov is going to win? Let me see some hands. And who thinks Deep Blue is going to win? Just one lonely camera. Okay. And we also would like to welcome community elementary school 70 from the south Bronx Bronx. Are you here? One of program C.E.S. 70, they have a strong coach, David McNuety. They have won many, many titles. Who is the champ here today? YASSER SEIRAWAN: Two hands. MAURICE ASHLEY: No consensus today? All right, still strong players. Welcome to students. We love it when kids come to watch. After all, they are our greatest fans. So welcome. (Audience applause.) YASSER SEIRAWAN: By the way, maybe you can help me on my chess history. We talk about Garry Kasparov as being the 13th in line of world champs. We go back to the original world champ, or the original recognized world champ, Wilhelm Steinitz, and I believe he was in a banquet with Zukertort, and it was a closing banquet of a great tournament, and the master of ceremonies had said something to the effect "Now, please, an applause for the world's best chess play," and both Zukertort and Steinitz stood up. And here we have it again, the best school player. MAURICE ASHLEY: Well, we have Kasparov deliberating on the position trying to figure out exactly what he was do. It's not easy to make a decision here because so much is going on, Yaz. YASSER SEIRAWAN: And he's been pulling some strange faces, Garry. Garry is not a happy camper. MAURICE ASHLEY: And he's known to pull those faces, too. We like to watch Kasparov because he is so expressive. We can count on him to let us know exactly what he thinks about the chess position practically at all times. We would like to take questions now from our audience, and we have a question over here to our left. AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yes, hi. Perhaps Mr. Valvo when he goes off stage could inquire, it's curious because I was wondering if you could address the possibility that perhaps Joel Benjamin prepared this entire line in advance as a potential cook of the Caro-Kann? MIKE VALVO: Well, there's two possibilities. First of all, they have pretty much but in -- put in all of the current games of Grandmasters, and it could be part of that. That's why I was curious about the Bf4 move was part of their book or not. AUDIENCE MEMBER: Right. MIKE VALVO: And of course there's the possibility as you suggest that it was prepared in advance and it was analyzed, but that Bf4 delay bothers me. It makes me wonder if they actually did go into it deeply or if the game that they followed went a different way at some point. And I intend to go up and talk to both Patrick Wolff and to whoever I can find. I'm about to leave and find out some information. AUDIENCE MEMBER: That would be very interesting to me because of course the question then becomes, if this was a line that was essentially forced upon Deep Blue, you folks alluded to that before, if it got this nice positional improvement, it may not realize it and may then revert back to a more materialistic strategy and allow Garry to equalize. You know, that's why I'm curious if you folks think this has been fixed on Deep Blue or if it's really been seeing this advantage all along. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, what you're saying is the sword cuts both ways. If in fact Deep Blue wins today and it wins solely because Joel Benjamin or other Grandmasters have prepared the game, and Garry Kasparov is an unfortunate victim, that's one way the sword cuts. The other way the sword cuts is, like the gentleman suggests, the game hasn't been analyzed by Deep Blue to the nth degree, it's been given a position that it doesn't like, spoils it, and it says, "Hey, I didn't lose the game. My jerks who prepared me for it did." (Audience laughter.) MIKE VALVO: Also considering the fact, the possibility that Garry did this deliberately. You know, Garry is a great expert on the white side of this line. It's amazing to me, he -- to me that he doesn't know about this Nxe6 and that he just fell into it. MAURICE ASHLEY: I am sure he knows about Nxe6. The question is whether or not he just kind of transposed moves in the heat of the moment and allowed it to happen. In fact, after Nxe6 it was clear from his expressions, he shook his head, and played his response instantly. It's not as if he played Nxe6 and said oh, where did that come from. He immediately played Qe7, because he knew that to be the only move in that position. The way he's acting, he'd have to be an academy award winning actor to be pretending that he's not upset by this position, getting into this situation. I'd be shocked if he came out and said, "Yeah, of course, I had it all prepared." (Audience laughter.) YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, there's no reason to pull faces in front of Deep Blue. It's not going to work. (Audience laughter.) And I agree, Garry Kasparov has not won any Oscars, but the reality is that Garry Kasparov is a very passionate person, he does reveal himself openly, and I really think that h6 was simply a failure. MAURICE ASHLEY: Well, Mike we know it is your break so we'll let you get the low down on the situation. We're talking today because someone asked Joe, how do you feel sitting across from Kasparov? And his reply was "I was terrified." So what Garry does does work to some extent. MAURICE ASHLEY: Well, it made him not touch the right bishop earlier! MIKE VALVO: He almost moved the wrong piece. MAURICE ASHLEY: He almost moved the wrong piece. MIKE VALVO: But, you know, there's an old rule in computer chess that computers are not responsible for human error. I'll leave you with that thought. We will thank our colleague, Mike Valvo. YASSER SEIRAWAN: We'll take questions from the audience in just a moment. MAURICE ASHLEY: Yaz, I'm looking at this position, and I'm thinking I like white, but I would hate to see Qe2 and Qxe6. That would just ruin everything. But there are other threats, aren't there? I mean isn't a move like Bf5 to be thought about here? White doesn't have to do anything agrees at the moment. YASSER SEIRAWAN: No, exactly. He can just sit on the position. It's not easy for black to decide what he's going to do. Black could make a number of quiet moves, including moves like Qd1-Qd2, menaceing Qa5+. Qd3, coming over to b3 to hit the e6 pawn. There are a number of really juicy attacking options here for white. And Garry is going to be under the gauntlet for a long time. MAURICE ASHLEY: The worst part is this bishop on f8 and his rook on h8. And they're just wondering when they ever will get in the game. I mean this king completely spoils all harmony. This queen blocks this bishop. This bishop on b7 wondered who put it there behind this pawn. I mean the pieces just look horrible. How could Garry Kasparov play that? It's almost sick looking, this position. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, the only thing that could be said in his defense is he's got a piece for his troubles. I mean it counts, it counts. Let's take some questions over on my left side, please. AUDIENCE MEMBER: Does Qb4 win a pawn? MAURICE ASHLEY: You want to win more stuff? Qb4, does Qb4 win a pawn. YASSER SEIRAWAN: I think the gentleman is thinking this is a double attack against the pawn on a4 as well as the pawn on b2, and indeed this would provoke white to do something on the queen-side. However, Qb4 also leaves a pawn hanging. AUDIENCE MEMBER: (Gasp.) YASSER SEIRAWAN: Can you recognize what you've done? That e7 pawn would allow that rook to come crashing down, and just to show you some of the problems that might occur is after Rxe6, if you were to play, for argument's sake, b5xa4, then after Qe2 you've got to pay attention to Re8 mate. You say that? MAURICE ASHLEY: They say that. They're national champions. They see everything. So, Qb4, it's doubtful Kasparov will try to make a move like this now. The problem is, Yaz, and, you know, you haven't said it yet. You've been making these wonderful generalizations, evaluations about the position. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Thank you. MAURICE ASHLEY: But you don't want to say what black should do, do you, because it doesn't look like black has many moves here? YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, indeed, Garry's options are quite limited. I would reduce them to just a few candidate moves. I noticed that Fritz says that there are 31 legal moves in the position for black. And let's just talk about our little toolbar here. This is a very nice visual aid. What we see here is that -- okay, this is Fritz 4.01. Next to it is this little equals-over-plus sign and this minus .44. What that means is, in the view of Fritz, black has a slight advantage. Equals over plus means a slight advantage for black. But the numerical value of .44 refers to its material bias. It thinks that 1.00 is worth a pawn. So when it's .44, it thinks 44 hundredths of a pawn, the position is better for Garry Kasparov. That is the view of Fritz. Below that we see Fritz's suggestion. Fritz says that the move bxa4 is Garry's best move, and this is a horrible move. GK MOVE: 13...Nd5 MAURICE ASHLEY: Kasparov has played Nf6-d5, centralizeing the knight, and, and Deep Blue had anticipated this response, and has immediately -- DB MOVE: 14 Bg3 GK MOVE: 14...Kc8 YASSER SEIRAWAN: I think that these were the right moves for Garry, by the way. He didn't have many options. If we just go back a couple of moves after for example Re1, what really could he do? If he moves his queen, as we've seen like b4, then he loses the e6 pawn. The Bf8, the rook on h8, they can't move. If the knight on d7, for example, was to move to b6, Nd7-b6, well, this would allow white to bring his knight very powerfully with Nf3-e5. There's the fork on f7. So, in a sense, Garry's options, defensive options were extremely few and far between, and the move -- one of the things I have to say about the move Nf6-d5 is at least it's consistent. His whole idea was to play b7-b5, keep the knight on d5, and fine, he's established it. We saw the response Bg3. Again, this is a little bit of a problem because of the move Bh4 could make life very unpleasant for black. And Garry played Kd8-c8. Again, a good move. Because this makes room for his queen. I think Garry is anticipating that he's going to have to give up a second pawn. I think Garry is getting himself ready for the moves either Qe7-d8 so he can develop his king-side, or at least Qe7-f6, because we know that bishop on g6 is just so powerful. MAURICE ASHLEY: And he has shown that there is a way to unravel the position a bit. He's planning to develop -- there's still the long-term problem, Yaz, of this rook on a8. This rook on h8, as you said, the queen is ready to move. It could drop back to d8. This pawn, though, still has to be watched. He could also think about a more aggressive posture, like Qf6. Then the bishop on f8 would come out and the rook on h8 would be able to come out. That still would not solve the rook on h8's problem and hopefully in Kasparov's mind the development of the forces for white will not reach proportions that will be destructive to him. So Garry is trying to solve his problems. What else can you do? YASSER SEIRAWAN: Exactly. MAURICE ASHLEY: You've got a position, you have to play it. So he's going to show his human fortitude and tenacity, and we can only hope that he doesn't get blown off the board. YASSER SEIRAWAN: While showing his fortitude and tenacity. A question from the audience, please? AUDIENCE MEMBER: My question backtracks to move 1 both yesterday and today. Yesterday's Indian opening and today's Caro-Kann showed that Kasparov is choosing his best feel for the position, it seems he's a better positional player than the computer. So deciding on an Indian opening with the Caro-Kann is a conscious decision outlining a strategy. Now, what kind of terse move does the computer? Does he operate entirely at random, or when the computer makes its first move, like today, a king pawn move, he wants open play, its combative moves. What makes the computer make that option? Is it entirely option? Can it be programmed at level one? MAURICE ASHLEY: Oh, most definitely. And Deep Blue -- they have chosen e4 -- the programmers have, because it is their belief that it will lead to the kind of positions that Deep Blue will be able to use its skills the best in. It's not that Deep Blue -- obviously not what Deep Blue wants or what Deep Blue favors, because Deep Blue can't do any of that, but they know that -- at least they feel that with the kind of ability it has to calculate so many moves per second, which is much, much better than what Kasparov can do, or any human can do, that those kind of positions with -- where those complications can occur will certainly favor Deep Blue, and it should lead toward those kind of situations. In an opening like d2-d4, that could lead to several blocked positions and computers historically have shown that they're not really very good at blocked positions. Maybe Deep Blue is an -- has an improvement on previous computers, but even though it would prefer to go into situations that historically have shownoids -- otherwise. Well, Kasparov -- YASSER SEIRAWAN: Just to buttress that point, in both Philadelphia and in New York, every game that Deep Blue was white it's chosen e4. So that's not random. We have another question over on our right side. AUDIENCE MEMBER: Just a comparison with last year's match, in game 6 Kasparov trapped Deep Blue's rook and bishop in the corner, and now it looks like the tables are turned. MAURICE ASHLEY: Very good point indeed. YASSER SEIRAWAN: The gentleman recalls for us that in the sixth game of the Philadelphia match, Garry Kasparov won decisively by outmaneuvering the computer and forcing its rook passively in the corners, and here we have something similar. Just looking at some random variation in the game. Following the move by Kasparov of Kc8, I'm looking at the move 15 Qe2 Qf6 Qxe6, what Deep Blue might play because it wants to win its pawns back, its material back. Qxe6 Rxe6 and now because of the threat of Re6-e8 checkmate, I was just looking at Nc7, a further sacrifice this, time not of a piece but of a rook. Ra1-e1 Nxe6 Rxe6. Kind of a crazy position arises. I mean white's a whole rook down. I think he may have a pawn or two for it. But this threat of Re8+ is quite powerful. For example, Nd7-f6 gives us this opportunity for Bg6-f5, setting up Re6-e8 double-check mate. Not just one time, but two times. And you played king out of that checkmate with Kc8-d8 now we follow up with Nf3-e5, and again similar threats of Nf7+. So kind of an intriguing way of winning a pawn and continuing the attack. And this might be what Deep Blue will do, especially if Garry has chosen a defense that wasn't preprogrammed. MAURICE ASHLEY: Well, that is interesting, and it just shows, it just goes to show that the evaluation -- that an exchange of queens alone -- DB MOVE: 15 axb5 MAURICE ASHLEY: Because the exchange of queens it seems there may be some attacking chances still. Deep Blue has captured instead axb5, and Kasparov has recaptured cxb5. GK MOVE: 15...cxb5 MAURICE ASHLEY: We should note that Kasparov has a dressing room in the back and he often retires to it. There is a television in there so that he can see if a move has been played on the board. So he likes to go back there either because of nervous tension or just give himself a break from the chessboard. Now, Yaz, there are a number of moves in this situation for Deep Blue, different ways to carry out the attackment at the moment he could actually win back a pawn it seems with the move Qe2. But you're exploring a different variation here, the possibility of Qd3 seems to attract you. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, yeah, this is -- first of all, I like this move axb5 in some ways because the computer hasn't just gone ahead and played Qe2 in order to win this pawn on e6. It seems that Deep Blue recognizes that it wants to keep queens on the board, so that already shows sophistication, a sophisticated understanding at least of this position. MAURICE ASHLEY: Well, Qe2 could still be played -- sorry to interrupt -- it's still possible. And this makes it clear that he wins the pawn back. YASSER SEIRAWAN: But then the idea would be Deep Blue would say, "Well, the move axb5 cxb5, that trade, that exchange actually helps black in some ways because that bishop on b7 is no longer hemmed in by that pawn on c6. So when you're attacking and especially a direct attack against a king, one of your principal ideas is to open the position. By opening the position we mean forcing the exchange of pawns. So we're just looking now at a possibility of Qd1-d3, attacking the pawn on b5. Garry may play the move Qe7-f6, but I'm just wondering what would happen after a7-a6 c2-c4, and then we can see the effect of what Deep Blue wants to do. bxc4 Qxc4+, Garry's king is in deep trouble, deep trouble. And this is exactly what Deep Blue wants to do is open up the position for his attacking pieces. MAURICE ASHLEY: This is not the kind of position Kasparov is going to want to play, and he'll have to figure out a way to keep the lines closed and not have to come under the attack of Deep Blue's converging pieces. YASSER SEIRAWAN: We should also talk about the three-minute rule -- and it's not a rule, so let me correct myself -- but Deep Blue -- the time control is 40 moves in two hours, meaning that Deep Blue has three minutes, on average, per move. So the programmers have said -- the programmers have said -- DB MOVE: 16 Qd3 YASSER SEIRAWAN: -- that Deep Blue should play a move every three minutes and the computer should think on Garry's time as well. This ensures that the computer will never lose on time. So when the computer played the move axb5 cxb5 came from Garry right away, we can expect the computer to play within three minutes. MAURICE ASHLEY: And it has done so. YASSER SEIRAWAN: It was getting close to the three-minute mark. MAURICE ASHLEY: Well, Qd3 shows Deep Blue avoiding the forced win of material. Very big point, was my concern earlier that Deep Blue might have played the move Qe2, seeing the attack on the e6 pawn and seeing the attack from the b5 pawn. That's materialistic. That's as far as we understand, typical for computers. They see a pawn, they want a pawn, why not, it's a pawn. This move is very atypical. Qd3, Yaz, I dare say, it's a very human move, showing a complete understanding, complete understanding of the situation, and it knows -- forget the material -- that's going to lead to bad positions, I'll end up losing, I don't want the pawn back. I'm going to mate your king. That sounds nice. YASSER SEIRAWAN: It does. But I don't like the -- I think it's just a sophisticated understanding. And we saw Garry just a moment ago very sternly shaking his head and not a happy camper. MAURICE ASHLEY: It has surprised him with so many decisions. I mean we have to really give kudos to the programmers because they have this computer playing such wonderful chess strategy. Game two was indeed a masterpiece of chess strategy, and you yourself said that's the best game you've ever seen a computer play. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Absolutely. MAURICE ASHLEY: And just time and time again it plays these moves, makes these decisions that you just really have to be in awe of the work the programmers have done to get it to play chess on this amazing level. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Absolutely. Kudos to IBM and its staff. Absolutely. (Applause.) But the thing that's making Garry annoyed is that in his practice match strategy, all of the computer specialists that were helping him have told him that he can expect a computer that will go after material. And when you see a decision like Qd3, Garry shakes his head and he says, "Darn it. The computer is not playing like a computer, and I want to see the printouts to make sure that there's not any intervention, because this computer is playing too darn good." MAURICE ASHLEY: And he needs to be surprised at this moment. It looks like he hasn't been able to get his composure back because of it. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, game two came as a shock, but we do have a move now by Garry. GK MOVE: 16...Bc6 MAURICE ASHLEY: Defending his pawn, and again getting up from the board, walking away and he's prepared it looks like a little cubbyhole for the king on b7. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Nice, nice. MAURICE ASHLEY: Which would solve the problem we're talking about of the a8 rook and slowly but surely we see Kasparov trying to solve all the problems. And if Deep Blue doesn't come up with a concrete plan soon, it could very easily find itself down a piece. But in the meantime there's so many possibilities for attack, Yaz, and again you're busy exploring one just now. I can't keep you under control, you just want to -- YASSER SEIRAWAN: It's exciting possibilities here for Deep Blue. MAURICE ASHLEY: What was that last one about? You're thinking of maybe the move Ra6? YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, after the move Bc6, you're absolutely right, Garry is preparing that nice little box for his king on the queen-side with Kc8-b7 and I was just looking at Ra1-a6, just going all out for the attack. MAURICE ASHLEY: Attacking the bishop on c6, which is currently undefended. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Now, the bishop can't drop back, the bishop can't go back to b7 because of that e6 pawn would be munched. Ra6xe6. So Garry would have to make one of several choices. He's either have to bring his king to b7, which is the first and most obvious choice, and then I was thinking a sacrifice, just Rxc6 Kxc6 c4. This is probably not going to work as far as an attack is concerned, but -- MAURICE ASHLEY: Looks tempting. YASSER SEIRAWAN: There's some dangers in this position. For example bxc4 -- MAURICE ASHLEY: I should just note for the moment that Fritz 4, despite being up loads of material -- YASSER SEIRAWAN: A whole rook. MAURICE ASHLEY: -- a whole rook, is saying it only has a tiny advantage as black which is a concession on Fritz 4's part, which is saying I'm only up a rook, which is five points, but here it says it's only up a pawn, which is a certain begrudging admitting that there are certain dangers here. YASSER SEIRAWAN: bxc4 Qxc4+. Garry's king would have to drop back, and -- MAURICE ASHLEY: Either b6 or b7? YASSER SEIRAWAN: Probably b7. And unfortunately now in this particular case, if our bishop on g6 were to assist our queen, we could do something wonderful like Qa6 checkmate or things like that. So these are the things that Garry has to worry about. And also I want to say that for the defender, the defender has to look at so many threats that it's much easier when you're playing against the computer to be on the attack than you are when you're on the defense, because on the defense, you have to keep Des Moines mind -- keep in mind everything that's possible. Pieces swinging over, pieces coming up and down the board. DB MOVE: 17 Bf5 MAURICE ASHLEY: I suggested this possibility earlier but for me I see it as a surprising move. And Yaz, you can help me here. First of all, Deep Blue is down a piece for one pawn. It wants to attack, more so than anything else. Recapturing the material especially the e6 pawn is not in the program, at least should not be in the program. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Unless it's done under favorable circumstances. MAURICE ASHLEY: Unless it's done under fantastic circumstances. Here, though, it comes as a big surprise to me. Because here the possibility is capturing the bishop and after Rxqueen, maybe even just bishop takes, maybe. The reason being that now, Kasparov has gotten a knight -- in this case you have to give up the f5 pawn, but he's gotten a knight, rook, and bishop, which is numerically 11 points. A rook is five points, a bishop is three and a knight is three. That's 11 points. And what he's giving up is a queen and two pawns. That's also 11 points. The queen is nine and the two pawns, right, is 11. So that equalizes the material balance. It does bring about a strange situation on the chessboard. But it seems to me to solve some serious problems for him. His rook on h8 is now ready to come in the game. The bishop on e7 is already in the game. And after one move, Kb7, the other rook will be in the game. Now, those problems will be solves. The question is, how ferocious is the white queen? Will it cause too many problems with the distribution of material? To my eyes, I don't know. I'm really not sure. I sort of like black -- I didn't like black at all a second ago, but now I'm starting to feel a bit more comfortable, just a little bit. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, I'll tell you, in general, it's better -- GK MOVE: 17...exf5 MAURICE ASHLEY: He has taken the bishop. MIKE VALVO: YASSER SEIRAWAN: And in fact he had no choice. I would say in general, three pieces for the queen favor the three pieces. A rook and two pieces for the queen really favors the three pieces. However, that's not the overall determining factor in this particular position. First of all, Deep Blue will have two pawns for the queen. But far more importantly, that black king is exposed on c8. Even if it gets to b7. Let's look at the situation we were just looking at -- MAURICE ASHLEY: I'm sorry, I hate to interrupt, but Kasparov is doing some very strange things right now. DB MOVE: 18 Rxe7 GK MOVE: 18...Bxe7 MAURICE ASHLEY: Another unusual thing is he's put the watch back on. That's as cryptic as ever when he puts the watch back on. Usually he puts the watch back on when he thinks the game is over. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Usually for himself. MAURICE ASHLEY: Not right in the middle of the game. And he has played Rxe7 Bxe7 -- YASSER SEIRAWAN: We are anticipating Qxf5 and after a move like exf5 there's all kinds of problems. Notice the bishop on g3 covers -- the bishop can easily fall victim to what we call an overload tactic, when one piece has to defend so many pieces, there's always a problem that there's an overload tactic and he may go down. MAURICE ASHLEY: Garry does not look happy. He looks disgusted, in fact. He looks like he can't believe what's going on right now. And I don't really see a move. Maybe we should go back a step in this position. Maybe there's another move for white. Fritz, of course, is now changed its opinion and is giving white the advantage. And Kasparov is still shaking his head. YASSER SEIRAWAN: He almost seems to be talking to himself, almost talking to the programmer. I mean it's not disturbing Deep Blue, but it's scaring the heck out of me. It almost seems to be giving up. MAURICE ASHLEY: He's looking off stage, it looks like he's ready to -- he's looking at someone else. He does have a coach who is in the room with him but who cannot interrupt in any way. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Absolutely not. MAURICE ASHLEY: Cannot speak to Kasparov. This look of his is certainly one, almost of resignation on his face. YASSER SEIRAWAN: IM Michael Valvo. YASSER SEIRAWAN: We're seeing some incredible reactions by Garry Kasparov. He really is an unhappy camper. MIKE VALVO: Well, there's some interesting things from upstairs. YASSER SEIRAWAN: All right. MIKE VALVO: One thing I wanted to find out was, was Bf4 actually calculated or not, but I couldn't find that answer out. Although Jonathan Schaffer, who we talked to yesterday, who was the programmer of the world champion computer chess program -- computer checker program said that he believes that it was calculated. I talked to Patrick Wolff, who has played the white side of this line and I said do you think Garry did this on purpose? He said, "Absolutely. Garry did this on purpose. And it was very brave for him to do." MAURICE ASHLEY: And he should get an Oscar? MIKE VALVO: -- DB MOVE: 19 c4 GK MOVE: Kasparov resigns. MAURICE ASHLEY: Whoa! Kasparov after the move c4, has resigned! It's over just like that! We should say that Deep Blue has upon the match. IBM computer Deep Blue has defeated the world champion Garry Kasparov in an absolutely stunning, stunning 19 mover! And Kasparov has just simply stormed away. We should say congratulations to Deep Blue and their programmers. (Audience applause.) Yaz, Fritz four now is going nuts, saying that Kasparov in fact has a huge disadvantage. In fact, white has a winning advantage after c4, and we will attempt to analyze this position. I know you guys didn't come here and expect to be out this quick, but we will try to get as much as possible done. There will be ceremonies taking place on stage. We hope that Kasparov will come to the stage. It will be a difficult thing for him to do after such a loss. But there are indeed a lot of questions. We're not prepared for this. I thought I was going to get a break for a second, an hour into the game, and it's over. Yaz, what are your impressions? This is stunning. We never expected this to happen, never, never at all. YASSER SEIRAWAN: With all due respect, the final position, let's just try to understand what Garry saw. What Garry saw was that after this move c4, remember what we were talking about, that overloaded bishop, how it would suddenly become vulnerable. If Bxb4 -- Bxc4 Qxc4, queen mate. The whole strategy had been to keep his knight on d5 with b7-b5. So c2-c4 disrupts his defensive formation. I think his resignation looks still premature. There are several moves in this position. There's Nd5-b4 -- well, let's just see the most -- Nd5-b4. What does Fritz see that it thinks is the best? Fritz likes to take the pawn on f5, and he gives himself a valuation of a pawn and a half -- a pawn and a quarter. It's growing, it's growing. MAURICE ASHLEY: Well, after this -- if bxc4 is not possible, Yaz. One has to admit that black's position is going to be in trouble very quick. Because these two pawns are not funny. Having these two passed pawns coming down the board, you can't like what's about to happen. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, let's take a look. Okay, you're going to play Qxf5. And I agree, I don't want to see those pawns any more than you do, so let me take one. bxc4. Now what we recognize -- MAURICE ASHLEY: Now there's a lot of moves. I was about to throw Ne5 into the mix. Ne5 has different ideas. One, I could always get the pawn back here. The threats to the bishop. Queen is thinking about penetrating into e6 with a double attack. A lot of threats, Yaz; a lot of threats. YASSER SEIRAWAN: That bishop on g3 -- MIKE VALVO: And already Fritz 4 is projecting a 3.66 advantage for white in this position, which Fritz 4 is just evaluating a huge material loss for black and no way for him to prevent the flood from coming in and washing those pieces away. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Wow. Well, with all due respect to Patrick Wolff, I think the move by Garry h7-h6 was a simple figure failure and Garry spell into a known book trap. We hope to get C. J. Tan and his IBM team to address us and at the same time we'll take some questions perhaps from the audience. Because all I can say is I am stunned. I absolutely did not, did not expect this result. Question in the back? Wow. Holy cow. AUDIENCE MEMBER: I'd like to take a look at sort of the overall Deep Blue vs. humanity thing that we were talking about on Mother's Day to begin with. And as we know we're not as fast as cheetahs, we don't do math as fast as Deep Blue does. I don't see any intelligence here in Deep Blue. I see a lot of heuristics, I see a lot of pattern recognition. I don't see anything here that says that if Kasparov had 30 games or 40 games, he wouldn't figure out a way to win consistently. So, should we really be worried about if there's an intelligence shown here? MIKE VALVO: Well, I don't think they ever claim intelligence. They didn't say that -- AUDIENCE MEMBER: Right, but that was on you humanity aspect, the last bastion about what makes this human is under threat. MIKE VALVO: I think you're implying if machines had intelligence we'd be in trouble in some fashion. AUDIENCE MEMBER: So maybe the Deep Blue team -- if Deep Blue can just sit in the corner and get smarter by itself, then we'd all be in trouble. YASSER SEIRAWAN: I'd just like to say that for myself, I agree, there wasn't any claims by IBM that it was showing intelligence. But from my perspective it is absolutely stunning to me that Deep Blue wins this match. I thought it was going to be years and years and years into the future. All I can say is what I just witnessed is a landmark achievement in the history of computers. MAURICE ASHLEY: But Yaz, Yaz, what happened we just witnessed? To me, I have a slightly different spin on this. If you show this game to any Grandmaster on the planet, any Grandmaster and say, "Who do you think is playing black," not one would say Garry Kasparov. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Right. MAURICE ASHLEY: To me it seems that this goes beyond just whether or not the computer is intelligent. We really just witnessed a human failing here, and it touches -- as it touches even someone as great as the Michael Jordan of chess. This guy has fallen apart in front of ghosts, practically. There was no reason for him to play chess like this. He never plays chess like this. Do you remember a 19-move loss by Garry Kasparov just blundering right from the opening? It doesn't happy. And clearly he's been rattled. He's been rattled by the computer showing its ability to play chess. Why need he be so rattled? Why not just -- we've said this this whole match. He was messing around in all kind of random openings instead of playing his thing, instead of having confidence in why he's the greatest human chess player on the planet. And he's let the computer throw him off his game. MIKE VALVO: May I jump in here a little bit? Yasser accepted -- Yasser excepted, of course, people that have a lot of involvement with computers that play them quite often begin to respect them more and more so that their play actually gets worse. I'm a living example. (Audience laughter.) YASSER SEIRAWAN: Your study of computers -- MIKE VALVO: I'm just wondering if Garry started seeing ghosts off his own mind and he was reacting to them, instead of what was in front of him. I think he should just be Garry and play Garry against this machine. Instead, he played like Karpov. MAURICE ASHLEY: Don't tell Karpov that he played like Karpov in this game! (Audience laughter.) YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, I have to agree that Garry came to this match with some very strange ideas, strange preparations. We didn't see the Garry Kasparov we all know and love. Instead we saw some different version which says, "This is my anticomputer version," and the anticomputer version just didn't look very good. With all respect, however, I mean with the exception of this game and game two, four of the six games he held an edge he just couldn't win them. I must say that for myself I'm still so stunned, it's very hard for me to absorb what this means. The gentleman's point is that "Hey, look, we're not as fast as cheetahs and blah, blah, blah, we're just going to have to accept that machines can catch up with us in some areas of intellectual pursuit." Yeah, yeah, yeah. It still bugs me. MIKE VALVO: I feel cheated somehow. I feel like -- YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, especially the game is over in one hour. I mean, gee, I haven't even gotten a break! AUDIENCE MEMBER: First of all, congratulations to the Deep Blue team. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Yes. (Audience applause.) AUDIENCE MEMBER: And my second question is, to my eyes, when Kasparov gave up his queen, I'm not sure what move that was, where he took the bishop. At that point I said he's lost. And I'm wondering if -- what your conclusion is at that point. MAURICE ASHLEY: Before we go there, we have a shot of Garry Kasparov in the press room. AUDIENCE MEMBER: Looks like a DMV photo. MIKE VALVO: Does that look like a mug shot or not? MAURICE ASHLEY: This has to be the lowest moment in Garry Kasparov's chess career. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Garry Kasparov is now on the 50th floor. He is in the press center. He is going to be addressing a press conference. I believe that we will be able to get a direct feed to hear some of the comments and questions. Garry is of course shell-shocked. MAURICE ASHLEY: He looks completely devastated. This has to be a total low point in his career, and now Monty Newborn of the ACM -- MONTY NEWBORN: We're waiting for the Deep Blue team to arrive and they should be upstairs at -- in about five to ten minutes at the most. So please be patient for a few minutes. MAURICE ASHLEY: So we will be able to hear the press conference upstairs as Kasparov is sitting, not saying anything to anyone, but questions will be addressed to him, and no doubt he will respond. He has represented himself quite well this match. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Just to go back to the gentleman's question, he said did Garry lose the game at the point that he won Deep Blue's bishop? Obviously Garry is facing at the moment that he took the bishop on f5 the threat of Re1xe6. That is a devastating threat, because then it would have a double attack against the queen on e7 and the bishop on c6. At the time that Garry took the bishop, I thought it was forced, that is, I thought he had to give up his queen. I don't know -- MAURICE ASHLEY: But there's no physical way to defend that pawn without creating some kind of -- YASSER SEIRAWAN: No "physical" way? Ha-ha. MAURICE ASHLEY: I'm just saying how do you do it. I'm just say Nc7 is one way you could try. But it seems as if Bxc7 Kxc7 and still maybe Rxe6 is very strong to me. YASSER SEIRAWAN: I agree. MAURICE ASHLEY: Just as a quick possibility. AUDIENCE MEMBER: I was just thinking, to my eyes, when the queen -- you mentioned that black does have compensation for the loss of his queen. But to my eyes, I see that in that book, that's like a Cuisine Art position for the computer to play. There's too many tactical possibilities for Garry to hold. MAURICE ASHLEY: You're right. And I think the point was for us -- AUDIENCE MEMBER: The Deep Blue team has arrived on stage. MAURICE ASHLEY: The point was for us we thought Deep Blue was materialistic, and it was in fact materialistic when it played c4 and realized it won more stuff. And of course Kasparov's resignation. So now the Deep Blue team has arrived. C. J. Tan is sitting next to Kasparov, and he's being miked up, I believe. But there will be some ceremonies -- ceremonial duties performed. We do have a winner. MONTY NEWBORN: I would like to extend my thanks to the many people that have been involved in this exciting, historical event in the history of computing. (This is the post-game press conference.) I would first like to discuss our stage agenda for the next ten to 15 minutes and then go on to thank these people. I would like to -- I'm going to thank a number of people. I'm then going to call on Dr. Tan. I'm then going to call on Garry Kasparov. We will then award the prizes. Joe Deblaz of the ACM will award the prizes and then there will be a question and answer session from the press. As I said, there's many people to thank for this exciting historical event. Certainly the audience downstairs and the press is one of the largest press events in the history of computing. First and foremost to thank is Garry Kasparov for being willing to compete in this historical event as the greatest chess player in the history of the game, he is extremely -- he has been most gracious to participate. It is an be event that we hope -- (Audience applause.) Garry has been assisted by two people in particular. His coach, Yuri Dokhoian. Yuri, are you here? GARRY KASPAROV: My team doesn't need a presentation. Just the Deep Blue team. MONTY NEWBORN: The Deep Blue team, the head of the Deep Blue team is Chun Jen Tan, C. J. for short. C. J. has been the leader of the project for the last five years and has brought together one of the outstanding scientific teams that we've seen to date. It's my pleasure to welcome and congratulate C. J.. (Audience applause.) I'll introduce your team, C. J.. It's my pleasure. Your team consists of Joe Hoane. Joe? I think a little quick perspective of each of these, of the responsibilities. Joe is involved in the multiprocessor side of the program. The Deep Blue program runs on several hundred computers, and Joe is the one that coordinates the activities between the computers, primarily. Murray Campbell. Murray, would you like to stand? Joe, why don't you stay standing. Murray Campbell is a is a Canadian. He has been involved in the critical aspect of the scoring function in this program in particular and much of the testing that's been done. This program is tested and tested, and it needs a strong player who understands what the mistakes are. Of course by this point Murray is getting help from even stronger players, but Murray is the one that's the chess expert in the bunch. Jerry Grotte. Jerry? Jerry is the one that makes sure that the day to day problems associated with the computer are ironed out. Somewhat of a technical expert with the hardware of Deep Blue. Joel Benjamin. Joel is the real chess expert for Deep Blue, not to take anything from Murray. Joel is an International Grandmaster and has been one of the top chess players in the United States for a decade, at least, now. Last but not at least is F. H. Hsu. F. H., if you were involved in baseball, would be the winning pitcher on the team. F. H. is the whiz behind the hardware and has been involved in this project from the very beginning. He's been one of the outstanding scientists in the United States. He's been recognized by the ACM for -- at that time he won the prize for the outstanding doctoral dissertation, which is awarded to one person in the United States every year. Last, but not least, is Miguel Illescas. Miguel? Miguel has been helping the team with some of the testing and opening book preparations. In addition to the Deep Blue team and Garry Kasparov's team, this match was run by the ACM, and there were several people involved in running it. It was a difficult chore, and there were a lot of compromises and things that had to be worked out. Carol Jarecki. Is Carol here? Carol was the match arbiter. Is she here? She may still be downstairs. Carol did an outstanding job staying on top of the problems from move to move, watching over the clock, watching over the opponents, and should be congratulated for doing an outstanding job. Ken Thompson, Mike Valvo, and myself had a difficult responsibility. We were in charge of questions related to problems that went beyond Carol. Ken is sitting in the front row. Ken, would you like to stand up? Mike Valvo is downstairs. We had some complicated issues to resolve regarding questions that Garry had raised on what information would be available to him during the course of the game about the Deep Blue program. As well, Garry had some serious questions about moves that seemed beyond what the computer was capable of doing. And the responsibility of examining the computer print out during the game was the responsibility of Ken Thompson. Throughout the games Ken monitored the TV screen, watching every move that Deep Blue played, and Garry couldn't believe a couple moves. At one point he requested a printout from two particular moves. Ken analyzed the printout and reported back to the Kasparov side that he saw no irregularities, and the issue seemed resolved. I would like to point out that the question of determining whether there's a spirit in the computer that came up with those moves which none of us could understand is a very difficult one. The amazing thing for the many of you here that aren't intimately involved in computers is that it would be almost impossible to expect the computer to play the same game again. The interreaction of the many computers will cause one computer to talk to the other one slightly before the other one talks to the other one if the game is played again, and information will not propagate throughout the computer system almost ever again in exactly the same day. And the small differences of sending the information around the system will result in different moves being made, if one attempts to repeat. Maybe one in ten or maybe one in 20 moves will be impossible to repeat. So we face very serious questions here, and I hope that we've resolved them satisfactorily at this point. I would like also to thank the match commentators, Maurice Ashley, Yasser Seirawan, and Mike Valvo. They were one step way from being weather forecasters in game five. The analysis was very difficult. The game was beyond those of us watching, and I would like to thank the three of them for having done an outstanding job. At this stage I would like to introduce C. J. Tan, who will address you for a few minutes. It's been a most exciting thing to be a part of this, and I'd like to thank C. J. personally for his keeping the ACM involved. C. J.? C. J. TAN: (Pulling out a prepared statement.) On behalf of the IBM Deep Blue team, I am indeed very proud to have played a role in this historic event. And this is a match that will benefit everyone, from the students, to the audience, to Garry and the computer Deep Blue, to many students outside this building who will be deeply affected by this advance in technology. And we would like to thank Garry Kasparov, one of the world's most brilliant minds, for participating in this great experiment. Garry is a man who sees the future, who understands where technology can take us. Playing with him gave meaning to this match. We would also like to thank Carol Jarecki, the arbiter, for spending hours in the match room and never stood up or left her desk. And Ken Thompson, the inventer of UNIX and a great pineer in many technologies in use in computer chess today. Who at in our private communications room hour after hour, to chat with us and discuss how the games are going. Why is there such global interest in this match? Because it visibly shows the world the technology, what technology can do for man, and how far we have been able to push technology, and what does this game mean for technology? The computer played Grandmaster level chess using strategy and speed. We learned how this nimble and powerful technology can be shared with the world and translated into real-time applications. Now that the rematch is over, where do we go from here? Well, we will be -- continue our partnership with Garry, but perhaps on a less competitive livil. We will be working with Garry in the development of his newly launched web sight, Club Kasparov, where he will share his chess brilliance with the world, and especially students all over the world. The match was tough on both of us. There have been highs; there have been lows. And we even had to take Deep Blue for a walk yesterday morning. What we have left to do now is perhaps to program Deep Blue to see how it can learn to take off its watch in the next match. So again, I would like to thank Garry and all of you that participated in this event with us. Thank you. (Audience applause.) MONTY NEWBORN: At this point it's my pleasure to introduce Garry Kasparov, who will address you, and I want to say -- an interesting end to the match. I would have loved to see both players win, but, Garry, you have my admiration for a long time to come. (Applause.) . GARRY KASPAROV: Enough. Sorry, I haven't deserved that. I have to apologize for today's performance. But I don't think it had anything to do with chess and with the match. I think Maurice Ashley made a very good statement yesterday saying that I sounded as if the match was over. And for me the match was over yesterday, and I have to tell that I had no real strengths to fight, and I think the result of the game today was quite justified. But that's probably not about the result of the man vs. machine competition. I don't think you -- I don't hope that it will be taken as granted. The match was lost by the world champion, but I think there are very good and very profound reasons for such a result. I was a bit surprised to hear from C. J. that now they would like to cooperate on a less competitive level. The cooperation just stopped (loud, roaring applause.) And I have no doubt that the spirit of the event will be no different from the one that took place in Philadelphia one year ago. Soon I recognized it was a grave mistake, with all the consequences that I have to pay at the end of the match, and in the middle of the match. It was nothing to do about science. It was nothing to do about furthering the investigation of computer potential of chess. There was one zeal to beat Garry Kasparov. And when the big corporation with unlimited resources tries to do so, there many ways to do that. I resigned today. I think the crucial game was game two. And again, Mr. Newborn, I have to tell you that this is not up to you and Mr. Thompson to make a judgment whether computer can play these moves or not. This is obviously beyond our understanding. Deep Blue is so complex, and I recognize the complexity of this machine, the old interconnections that it will never come up with a same result even if it were under test, again, and again, and again. But what is most amazing, that it's -- Deep Blue as we saw in game one and a couple of other games still has generic computer problems. And I'm sure that this is not up to people in this room, not to me, not to Deep Blue team to say it was absolutely correct and perfect. I believe that these printouts, if they are available, wanted by all chess fans, all computer and chess fans around the globe, and I think that two or three under powerful computers will tell us whether any other machine can do the same thing as Deep Blue did in this match. My personal feelings, I doubt. But again, we faced a machine that had no comparison to make moves that were beyond anybody's understanding. And I couldn't have anticipated it before I started to play. I have to tell you that game two had dramatic consequences and I never recovered after this game. Not because I lost this game. In fact, I could make a draw just instead of resigning. But because there were two major issues that are not yet resolved. Whatever people are saying here, I still do not understand how the most powerful and great machine couldn't see a simple perpetual check at the end of the game. I'm sure there will be answers provided. I'm sure there will be a lot of analysis later on. I'm sure I'm in the wrong position today to complain, because it will be written tomorrow that Garry Kasparov couldn't lose properly, couldn't be a sportsman, to accept his defeat, I can even name the newspapers that will write this. Yes, so be it, you know. Again, I understand, I fully understand all the consequences of the result of this match. But I think it's very important for all of us to state today that Deep Blue now must intercompetitive chess, competitive chess. You know, have the team play a normal event, play a world championship match, under proper conditions, and the scrutiny that every chess player has to go through. Play competitive chess, and we shall see whether this man is a prodigy, is a unique piece -- when this machine is a prodigy, is a unique piece, or is a lot of human weaknesses shown in one particular event. I think it's time for Deep Blue to prove that that was not a single event it could play. I think it's time for Deep Blue to start playing real chess. And I personally assure you, everybody here, that if Deep Blue will start playing competitive chess, I personally guarantee you I'll tear it to pieces -- some of them probably too shy to show up, they can hire the entire GM force of the United States of America, it will not help, because we know how the machine -- how a machine plays. Put it into competitive chess, put it in a fair contest, not that one, make IBM a player, not a sponsor at the same time, and we will see what is going on happen. And I think it is just the beginning. And I have to apologize again, I am ashamed by what I did at the end of this match. But so be it. I feel confident that the machine hasn't proved anything yet. It's a much better machine than the Philadelphia. It was clear from day one. But it's not yet ready, in my opinion, to win a big contest. That's my belief. And again, you can trust me; you can defy me, as a loser, I deserve that to some extent, but I think it's just the beginning. Thank you. (Audience applause.) MONTY NEWBORN: ...Garry we will get a chance to sit down at the table at least one more time. It's provided the entire country and the entire world a week of the most exciting chess that I've ever been a witness to and most of the rest of us. At this time I'd like to introduce Joe Deblazi, the executive director of the ACM who is holding a lot of money in his pockets and I did everything I can do to talk him into take taking a quick trip to Bermuda but it didn't work. Joe DeBlazi: I just want to say a few moves, not prolong this much longer, because I'm sure that Garry and C. J. want to move on and do other things they have to do. It's a pleasure that the ACM has been a sponsor of this year, like the match in Philadelphia. I was there when Garry Kasparov won. I'm here this year when Deep Blue won. One thing is constant over two years. The greatest chess player in the world is Garry Kasparov, period. (Mild audience applause.) A computer, even in parallel, cannot approach the capabilities of a human being. Understanding that, this was not a test of the human being. It was not a test of the greatest chess player in the world. What it was was a test to see how far we have taken this basic technology and what we can do with it. The winners in the future are the young people sitting downstairs who are interested now in chess. Or the young people and many of you in this room where this technology is going to be applied against your well-being in medicine and transportation and so many other fields. It is all of us who have won this match today. And the person that's made it possible is Garry Kasparov. So I'm not going to hand out a winning and losing check. I want to ask both people to come up and receive at least the financial reward of their efforts. So I'd like to ask Garry Kasparov and C. J. tan to come up. I thank you all for having been here. Thank you very much. MONTY NEWBORN: We'll have questions from the audience in 30 seconds. We'll give the photographers 30 seconds and then we'll have questions from the audience. 20 seconds. Let's just wait one minute until these -- let's sit down, please. Question over here? (Question not heard.) GARRY KASPAROV: I suggested that there were things in this match well beyond my understanding and the understanding of many people, and I can assure you that probably there is no way to prove that Deep Blue is making this move or that move, but I think it will be wise to run -- for everybody, who is curious, to run the tests. There are very specific positions, very similar positions in one game, just take only one game, game two, and I would like to run it, it will take maybe a week or two weeks, but then everybody can come up with a conclusion. If, at the end of the day, in two or three weeks' time, no machine in the world will not come up with the same answer. Unfortunately, it still means nothing. But, it will all be very interesting to hear explanations. Because unfortunately if I heard correctly, even Deep Blue team made some contradictory statements at the stage, about what machine saw or didn't see. But again, it's computer, you know, it's well beyond our understanding. Has a very different mind. It can come up with one decision and then change it, come up with another decision, as Mr. Newborn said, you know, if you run the test, Deep Blue can come up with a different answer. No doubt about it. But still as I said, there are some common things in many computers, and what's most important is the way of evaluation. And when Deep Blue goes as deep as 25, 30, 35, 40 ply, at one point it still should give the evaluation. It should evaluate the position. Because, you know, if you ask a very small computer about a given position in 25 or 30 ply, and it tells you that white is better, and if you ask Deep Blue before it goes all 30 ply, you know, Deep Blue with all respect to its power, it's not necessarily, you know, can anticipate this position better than a small computer. Now, again, even if we -- if nobody in this world will come up with the same result in game two as happened in the middle of the game. So it will mean absolutely nothing. But I can have my own opinion, and I was surprised very much, and this game had profound consequences and effect on my success in the match. Reporter: A lot of people are seeing the best chess player in the world beaten by a machine. Does that diminish the human spirit? -- human spirit? GARRY KASPAROV: I don't think so. And from my point of view, that was my mistake in my statement. You know, I was taking it in Philadelphia as a scientific experiment. That was a very competitive match for one side. And I was not ready to see what's -- you know, what was happening in this match starting from game two. I had mistakes in preparation. I mean probably it was difficult to prepare normally for an opponent with no games, with no ideas. And, what's most important, the opponent was constantly changing. I think it's another great achievement that Deep Blue team was able to change priorities during the match. I'm really amazed to see that you just change such fundamental things as bishop vs. knight and suddenly it becomes equal in game five. Yeah, it box equal because otherwise it doesn't take on f3. Maybe, you know, again I have no idea what's happening behind the curtain with Deep Blue. Maybe it is absolutely an outstanding accomplishment. Maybe, but I know a little bit about chess and a little bit about chess computers, and I don't think this machine is unbeatable. I think the machine has too many weaknesses, and in competitive chess, in real competitive chess, where you play a match, it will be a different story. (Unheard question.) As I say, I am ashame shamed. I am ashamed that I couldn't prepare myself properly for such an event. But again I would like to look at the results of the match in two or three weeks time when we can analyze the games and we can look at the printouts. I want to understand how Deep Blue won the match. Unfortunately you cannot do it before you look at what was produced by Deep Blue's mind during its hours and hours of calculation. (Another reporter question by Daniel Slater of ICC.) C. J. TAN: We will be publishing our technical work in technical journals and conferences and so forth. (Another reporter question, not heard.) GARRY KASPAROV: Again, I think that printouts will be available. Specifically we are talking about game two, moves that -- you know, the move Qb6 that was not made, and the final position. I think there are similarities in these two cases. Whatever and whoever says, there are clear similarities. And I want to see for instance, where Deep Blue stopped its calculation in game two. Because after Qc4 it was in check, couldn't stop its calculations when it's in check. We have to look at this, how can you play this thing where it's changing every day so rapidly and you have no idea and no control of -- let's look at this, I'm sure we'll study that. And there is a possibility that, you know, it was a great computer mind that came up with this -- with these ideas. There are many questions. For instance, why -- obviously the Deep Blue team will be willing to answer, what is the principle that computer -- for instance, in game one. We play game one. In game one computer spends three minutes per game -- each move and it spends six minutes at the end of the game where the position was bad. It saw that the position was losing. Interesting question, why Deep Blue didn't think longer before when position was dramatically, you know, going down. Probably didn't understand it. And then probably the computer's regime has changed. Interesting question, when computer spends 15 minutes or, you know, any time more than five minutes, that's a moment to ask for the printouts because it's interesting to see, what is happening inside the machine which is programmed to make moves within a certain period of time. (Reporter question about Deep Blue playing tournament games -- are you willing to have the computer enter regular Grandmaster tournaments.) GARRY KASPAROV: I don't think Deep Blue is too weak to play in regular tournaments. I believe that Deep Blue team now, it's time for them to claim the world champion. There are three or four players in the world that could Deep Blue who could play a candidate tournament and if they want to skip it and go straight to me and play a normal match in competitive chess, under conditions that will be imposed by an independent sponsor. I'm willing. I'm willing for this machine to play real event. And I think they must do it. They must do it one way or another, either to enter the competitive chess with other players -- I say, there's three or four in the world that can afford the luxury to play with such a powerful machine, because I'm not here to doubt the integrity of the machine which was at least two times stronger than Philadelphia. (Another report question, ending in "How could IBM cheat?" " GARRY KASPAROV: Again, I'd like me and you and everybody else to look at the printouts especially of game two, also game five, for instance, and to analyze what's happened. You know, I mean everything can happen in this world, but again at the end of the day I'm sure will come to the conclusion that Deep Blue is well beyond anybody's understanding in this world. But I would like to see first printouts because there is no information available to make a judgment. What's happened was outstanding from my point of view. Now,, you know, anything happens, you know, and different things happening, not only in Hollywood movies. (Reporter question: Game to game a general feeling for is the computer frozen or what's changed between games.) C. J. TAN: We said many times before this match, many things are improved this time around. Number 1 the machine is twice as fast, more computing power -- (another reporter question.) C. J. TAN: Yes, I'm answering your question. And the second thing is we're adding more chess knowledge. The first thing we have done, we have developed programming tools to allow us to adjust the parameters faster between each games. Well, the parameters usually are involved in the evaluation function for certain strategies and forth. I'm not prepared to get into the details at this point. (Reporter question: When the computer, Deep Blue took ten minutes to make any move, was there any hope from my program, any assistance of any programs, was there any suggestions from any of the programmers when Deep Blue took longer than shall we say three minutes or six minutes or whatever that the program, at the beginning of a particular game?" " C. J. TAN: Once the clock starts -- the answer, first of all, is "no." The second thing I would like to emphasize, once the clock starts, none of us can interfere with the Deep Blue system itself, and all the rules that are preestablished before this match and overseen by the arbiter Carol Jarecki and the committee meded by Monty Newborn, we followed their rules and in the printouts of several games as requested were given to the arbiter, Carol Jarecki. (Reporter question: Could you respond to Kasparov's earlier comment to which he basicly suggests that this was not at all about computer science or a machine and chess, that nothing was proved by the computer at all throughout this match.) C. J. TAN: Well, what we wanted to prove is to show that this technology and computer can indeed play at this Grandmaster level. GARRY KASPAROV: No, sorry. Probably you understood me wrong. No, I never proposed that we stop playing. I said there are three or four people in the world that could compete with Deep Blue. This is not about -- computer beating definitely, but computer is playing definitely by itself, as game one showed, on a very, very good level. C. J. TAN: In order to test out this technology, there's no other person better than Garry Kasparov to be our partnership in this experiment, and we did a very fortunate as I said a while ago to have Garry as our partner in this event. And if we have just played any other Grandmaster, it wouldn't be as meaningful as it would have if played with Garry. (Reporter question, not heard.) C. J. TAN: That's a very interesting idea. You understand so far we have been doing science, been in the laboratory constructing computers, and we want to take us away from that and become a professional chess player. It's a very difficult. We'll have to think about that. MONTY NEWBORN: I'd like to just have one quick introduction. Carol Jarecki has been somewhere over here. Carol here? Carol, would you just take a bow for a second? Carol did an outstanding job in the game room and was never seen by anybody for a whole week. Carol? Take a bow. (Audience applause.) (Reporter question: Comment on what this means to computer and chess..., inaudible.) GARRY KASPAROV: I don't think it's even close, that chess is taken over. You know, there was one man who was a very good player, maybe the best in the world, you know, cracked under the pressure. But that's nothing to do with computer being unbeatable. . This machine is vulnerable and I have no doubt in the proper competitive chess it will be beat. Now, that's -- you know, again you can -- you can say say it's a postmortem statement that's carrying no value, but I learned a lot during this match, and I know what you can do with the machine. You have to play on a very have I high level. I mean I have to show, you know, the best of my ability, but I have no doubt that this -- this machine with all these tools, you know, adjusting it, making it better during the match, this machine would be badly beaten if it's a proper competitive chess. (Reporter question, inaudible.) GARRY KASPAROV: Today's game don't even count as a game because probably it was even published somewhere else. I was not in the mood of playing at all. Because, you know, I'm a human being, you know, and after game two, I had, you know, some major, major problems of coming back to the match. You know, I proved to be vulnerable. So, you know, when I see something that is well beyond my understanding, I'm scared, and I know something well beyond my understanding. (Reporter question.) GARRY KASPAROV: Yeah, plenty of psychological effect. But, you know, as long as I could keep under pressure, you know, forget today game, I mean Deep Blue hasn't won a single game out of the five because again game two resigned when I could force a draw. Now, force a draw. Now, if someone has another position stand up and tell that the position was not a draw. Game two was resigned in a completely drawing position. Is that a correct statement? (To the Deep Blue team, who are all shrugging and shaking their heads.) The final position was a draw. We recognize that Deep Blue made a bad strategical position blundered and made a perpetual check. What I'm saying, before today's game, Deep Blue couldn't win a game, and I was playing on a high very level. I was proud of my games game one, game four, game five. You know, it means that machine is vulnerable, just add more energy, you know, just more resilience, and machine has no chance. (Reporter question, inaudible.) GARRY KASPAROV: One condition, IBM play and not a sponsor. I think that if it's competitive chess, there's no room for friendly relations and nice talks. I have excellent working relations with IBM, I hope we'll continue our work, but -- continue our war, but, you know, competitive chess has no room for these kind of friendly relations. And that was probably my mistake that I didn't understand understand before the match and it was not about simply playing, but it was only about winning for man -- YASSER SEIRAWAN: By the way, I've been told that Garry is going to be answering questions for about half an hour, but we don't expect him to join us here. (Reporter question.) GARRY KASPAROV: You know, when you play Deep Blue, you have a choice. Either to play sort of crap, you know, just very rare openings, or to play something -- the best lines you know. But to play the best lines you have to know your opponent. I cannot study all the openings. I mean I have to know what my opponent is playing, because the depths of the preparation, you know, it will be different. Now, if I have to play next time with Deep Blue, there is no doubt there will be an opening due and I will play a proper move, e4 with white and c5 as black, there is no doubt about that. But, you know, I played probably what was recommended by every computer specialist. You know, you don't start confrontation, and in game one proved perfectly a success. Deep Blue played a couple of moves, I think Patrick Wolff described it as, you know, Deep Blue was playing as a numbskull. You know, it was working. But suddenly it stopped working, suddenly Deep Blue found its way to break the pawn chains and start confrontation at a very convenient situation. Probably, no, with Deep Blue the normal computer strategy doesn't work. MONTY NEWBORN: We'll take three more questions from the audience. (Reporter question...and that seems to upset you. Did you make demands -- the same demands of human beings, say Mr. Karpov...would that upset you?) GARRY KASPAROV: You know I'm not that stupid to be upset if Mr. Karpov plays like Mr. Anand or Mr. Anand plays like Mr. Kramnik, but even human beings with human flexibility are not able to make change their style dramatically. You will never make the mistake of saying Garry Kasparov's games look like Anatoly Karpov's games. Unique in this match is the computers are flexible and are doomed to make similar mistakes in similar positions. This machine didn't make similar kind of mistakes. This machine adjusted itself during the game to situations that just arised. (Reporter question, inaudible.) GARRY KASPAROV: When you allow this piece sacrifice you can resign and there are many games in competitive chess that this line happened, but I mean hardly explain what I did today because I was not in a fighting mood. MONTY NEWBORN: Take one more question from the audience. (Reporter: It is usually that the chess competitors sit down after the game to sit down and discuss the game and analyze what they did. What was your incentive to keep your...so hidden and...show us the evaluation of Deep Blue, just lay open your strategy?) C. J. TAN: Well, analyzing the moves like chess players do, at another location we didn't have the opportunity, but to reveal the inner thinking of Deep Blue is giving away whatever it was thinking and preparing for the match -- for the game, and we would rather do that after the match and not during the match. That's like revealing everything we have programmed inside the computer. We don't have -- it's very difficult to tell computer "Give me this piece of information, but not everything else." So after this match there is certain information that's interesting to the public, we will be publishing that in the technical journals and also share that with many other people. (Reporter question, inaudible.) C. J. TAN: I believe we will be sharing some of the specific interesting information such as Mr. Kasparov, which perhaps the press in some appropriate form. GARRY KASPAROV: C. J., I think you understood me wrong, you know. I believe that there is rule in the game of chess that when the game is over, we sign score sheets and the score sheets are given to arbiter. Deep Blue's score sheets, printouts, I think that was no conditions, these all printouts from game one to game six must be published, somewhere, on Internet, and anybody who has interest in chess or in chess computers will study them. This is not our analysis, you, me,, or Mr. New bone or anybody else. Anybody who has interest. Because it's a great contribution to the game of chess and computer science. I believe it's your obligation to print out everything that Deep Blue has been considering during long hours of calculation. C. J. TAN: We will publish what is appropriate for an appropriate manner, because for 99.9 percent of the people will not understand what 101001 means, and especially the public. We will be glad to do that in the appropriate time. (Reporter question, inaudible.) C. J. TAN: We just like any other Grandmaster when you go into a match, you involved many friends and people for advice and so forth. And we have Joel Benjamin with us since August of last year, and since a month and a half ago, Grandmaster Miguel Illescas came over to help us analyzing and testing the program, through IBM of Spain. Joel Benjamin a Grandmaster has many other friends. Probably he has many other advisors talking to him. And they have their confidential, normal corporate confidential nondisclosure agreements, so it's not up to us to talk about it. MONTY NEWBORN: I'd like to close this press conference. (Reporter question, inaudible.) (Would you say that you were too nice to IBM...not have access to previous games as they had access to all of your previous games? In another chess match where any Grandmaster plays another Grandmaster they both have ack stoce many, many of their games. And here you were limited to almost no games and only had games as you played, whereas they had access to all your games.) GARRY KASPAROV: Unfortunately, I was playing too well in the last year, and I -- after Philadelphia, I didn't take it -- I mean I took it seriously, but I believe that my biggest mistake was not to demand certain conditions that would make this contest fair. Now, first, I think there must be some games available. This is number one. Number two, I think in the future matches we will consider more opening -- openness of Deep Blue even during the match. And I -- also, I have to confess that the biggest mistake was that I followed the advice of computer specialists that all recommended to play this way. I think this is the biggest way. And I said, if I have to play again, we'll play normal openings. This is no doubt. But in order to play normal openings with Deep Blue with a machine that has unlimited memory, has a great deem of -- team of Grandmasters, we don't know even the number, preparing that, I have to take it as a world championship match. I have to take it as competitive chess. I did not. I mean I played a friendly match. I was sure I would win, you know, because I knew that computer would make certain mistakes. And I was correct in game one. Suddenly it stopped making these kinds of mistakes, maybe at the beginning of game three. But my strategy failed. And maybe if I was in a better mood today I would survive but, you know, after yesterday's game, which was a very tough match, I lost my competitive spirit. Now, fair conditions, all the games available, and, you know, we take it really, you know, to win or lose, not to study computer implications. No, you have to -- to beat this machine you have to play proper chess. No, it's clear. Whatever happened in game two or game five, even to beat machine in game one, it takes a lot. It's a proper opponent, and I have to mobilize more my resources to play even through the match. But I -- you know, my preparation was so weak that, you know, I had to consider what to play before each game, because I decided not to go -- intentionally not to go to the main openings, and it was a mistake, because, you know, during the match we don't have time to come up with something that you play regularly. There is obviously these guys are studying very deeply. No, you have to come, start it out -- but it takes probably a couple of months preparation. My preparation was maybe ten days, and that was not enough, even close. (Reporter question, inaudible.) C. J. TAN: Since some of the annotated lines of other people before the match is probably okay, but if I give you the whole dump or whatever of whatever computer is thinking obviously you don't have any match at all. So again, I said we will publish some of that probably. Everybody is tired and I think we all need to go home and celebrate. I also want to answer once again, I've answered several times, about why Deep Blue's games are not available. The previous incarnations of Deep Blue, again, many games are available. Many, many of them are in the books. And if this version of Deep Blue took one year to develop, it is a very young system, and I would like to have many competitions so many games are available, so we can (word) as we go along. If we would have provided the games in November it would not be the same machine come February. And same thing, if we had provided games that it played in February, it would not be the same games that it would play in May. So since it's a developing system, those games become meaningless while we are doing development. (Reporter question about openings.) GARRY KASPAROV: I don't think that when I played -- you shouldn't be mistaken by looking at the first moves of game two or six. What I played, it was -- you couldn't consider it an opening, you know. But also in game two I played something that is -- you know, it's a main line, but you play sot decent moves, not the maneuvers that a couple of things happened in the games of the chess players. But in game two I believe I can afford certain things. I wanted to test how it moves in closed positions. I was very much surprised to see that Deep Blue didn't play on b5 because normally the computers don't keep the pressure, it starts taking an advantage. It didn't. It's a smart machine now. I learned something. Now, as for today, you know, in game four I successfully implemented something. But, you know, in game five, I recognized that, you know, even if I play some tricky openings, you know, the machine reacts very often like a human player, you know. There was no -- the strategy didn't work. Deep Blue didn't make the same mistakes I expected it to make. That's why, you know, I -- after e4 there is a very limited choice of dumb openings like I played in game four, and I tried to play something else. I didn't expect this main line, but again, I wouldn't like you to take this game as a serious one because my ability to fight was very much down. (Reporter question, inaudible.) GARRY KASPAROV: No, I don't think yet. I think eventually machine will prevail, but I don't think that you can take today's day as the day of doom. As I said it's just the beginning, and I have no doubt that personally I can beat the machine even if it has a new version in one year's time. But obviously it's a historical achievement that machine was even able to play in competitive -- on such a level with the world champion. Reporter: In another match in which you have unlimited access to...would that be more fair in this match?) C. J. TAN: Garry and I have talked about this new concept of man and machine playing chess together. What we have in this match is a precursor to that. We both use computers in different fashion. And Garry would very much like to propose the new form of chess he talked about with advanced chess where Grandmasters would have access to computers while you play chess against each other, either during a regular match, also the Internet. Those are many, many possible advancements that we could see for chess in the future. (Reporter: Asking question about using computer as an assistive database, not for calculating moves.) GARRY KASPAROV: It will help, but, again, I would prefer that, because that will relieve a lot of energy before the game. But I don't think it's yet needed, but it will definitely make my performance much better. Yeah, I was playing against myself and against something that I couldn't recognize. I believe I'm the best in the world and if I lose it's a result of my mistake. While I wasn't in good shape in this match, Deep Blue couldn't do anything. (Reporter question, inaudible.) Garry a world championship match is a world championship match. Now, you know, if I have to take it as serious as a world championship match, as defending my title, preparing properly for the opponent that I can identify, I will play very, very different. I will play differently, and again, if you want to check how confident I am, I can bet the entire prize fund of the next match, whatever it is, that I will beat the machine. (Audience applause.) GARRY KASPAROV: Yeah, because then advantages of machine are growing because, you know, I will be tired. I think we should play every second day. You should give a human being time to rest. You know, 20 days, ten games, proper match, you know, and I'm really taking the challenge and I believe that some other players would like to participate as well. It's not about becoming chess player. Again, I don't think there are many players to compete. I think there are very few that are are capable of fighting Deep Blue, but I think it's time to prove that the machine can do a little bit better than this match. (Reporter question, inaudible.) C. J. TAN: While we have the normal databases available, whatever Grandmaster games are meaningful, we update. (Reporter question for Mr. Newborn; the first thing that was said in the press conference was let's do it again. Why don't I hear that now?) MONTY NEWBORN: You've already heard it. You're hearing it from -- (Reporter inaudible.) MONTY NEWBORN: Well, these things get negotiated with the people involved and it takes a bit of time. We went away from Philadelphia, we've all been discussing the question about whether there's a potential rematch. It certainly is a subject of discussion. It's something that will get discussed between IBM and Garry over the next couple months, and if the ACM is a participant, we certainly would like to be involved. (Reporter question inaudible.) C. J. TAN: Well, obviously we are very flattered by this invitation to play with Grandmasters at their level, the highest level. And it's something that we will have to discuss and obviously -- personally I would like to see that happen. (Reporter question, inaudible.) C. J. TAN: Oh, I think in the sense that, as I said also that Deep Blue is a new system, it's not fully tested, and this is the first time we play six regular games. Obviously if we play more games we will find out new things, either bad or good. We don't know. (Reporter question, inaudible.) GARRY KASPAROV: This match has no rating implications. If you ask me to give a rating to Deep Blue, I think it's very -- it's almost impossible because you have to evaluate something that makes different moves. If you look at beginning of game one or game three, you will be flattered even to give any rating to this machine. Now, if Deep Blue at the end of game five or game four you will give it say 2800, or maybe higher. But I still think it's very difficult to make any rating evaluations today without machine playing the proper competitive chess. Now, it obviously plays many positions at the level of 2800 or above. But there are still many weaknesses, and probably the average will be somewhere around 2800 today.) YASSER SEIRAWAN: Did Garry say 2800 today? AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yes. (Reporter question, inaudible.) GARRY KASPAROV: Before the match I would say it's not flexible. Now I doubt, the machine is plex I believe. It knows how to change priorities, even during the game. There is obviously one big disadvantage of the machine, but obviously -- also it looks to be overcome in the match, that machine -- machine has a limit of calculation and at the end of this calculation it has to make evaluation. Now, we discovered that Deep Blue can make unbelievable evaluations of positions 20 moves deep, you know, 40 ply. Now, interesting, one machine's problem was in game one, which is machine doesn't understand positions where it has a material advantage or disadvantage, and if the implications are very long, now, in game one Deep Blue recognized it too late. MONTY NEWBORN: I'd like to close this press conference. I'd like to thank those that participated. We have an audience downstairs. The participants are not planning to come downstairs. But I'd like to thank them for their participation over the afternoon. I myself thank everybody that's involved in this point and hope to see everybody on stage one more time next year. (Audience applause.) MAURICE ASHLEY: Not much to say. What do you think the implications are going to be from today? YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, obviously this is -- they're 1-1, if you will. I think it's going to be in IBM's interests to see a third. I liked the things that Garry was saying that he'd like to see Deep Blue tested against other top Grandmasters. Garry has already predicted the sore-loser newspaper articles, but I think that he really carried the foint far too far, that there with the intervention and so on. The fact of the matter is this is an extraordinary computer and it played very well and it had a lot of problems that Garry couldn't solve the riddle. Finally, I was a little bit disturbed by what Garry was saying there about IBM. I just want to say again, for myself, this is some of the most exciting chess I saw. I think IBM is a terrific sponsor, and please, once again, join me in congratulating them. They have every right to sponsor a match. MIKE VALVO: I'd like to make some obvious comments. Garry implied that there might be some cheating. And I say that word. Is that too strong? But, think about it. Is it in IBM's interests to cheat at something like this? No, I don't think so. I think what was happening here is something Garry couldn't explain was in the machine, and because he couldn't explain it, he said, "There must be something funny going on." I think there are explanations. I think that -- I hinted at them when I said that the computer had some extreme flexibility with king safety, that it seems to -- seemed to allow two or three pawns worth of value for king safety. And I was told that the computer considers both sides when it looks at king safety, not just its own and a small regional effect. It looks at the entire board. And if it's dangerous for them, it's okay if it's dangerous for the other guy, too. And it takes that hand in hand. And Garry didn't understand that idea, or didn't think of that idea, and -- well, maybe there are other explanations for what happened than what he chose, and I wish he wasn't so sore about it, but I suspect that if there is a match next year, and I hope there is, that he will become aware of some of these considerations and try to deal with them in other ways. MAURICE ASHLEY: Well, this match has been rich with stories. The controversy will not end. Last year's match 4-2 in Kasparov's favor. This year 3.5-2.5 in Deep Blue's favor. And we will see, I'm sure, more of the same. It has indeed been exciting. We thank you all for joining us, and we hope again that this is not a match about human vs. machine. It is a match that will answer some basic questions and help us to understand our world a bit better. MIKE VALVO: Thank you very much. Garry is coming down! YASSER SEIRAWAN: No, no, there is a possibility. MAURICE ASHLEY: A possibility that he will join us downstairs. YASSER SEIRAWAN: I'll go check it out. MAURICE ASHLEY: Yaz will scout that idea. YASSER SEIRAWAN: I beg your pardon. We now have a confirmation that IBM's team, the Deep Blue team will be joining us shortly. MAURICE ASHLEY: And we'll see if there's any word of Kasparov, but I doubt Kasparov will actually come, but the Deep Blue team will be here shortly. Just the IBM team will be coming shortly and we'll allow you to ask them some questions. MIKE VALVO: Do you think there was enough drama in this match for you all? YASSER SEIRAWAN: The question is, I think we may have lost some of our roving mikes. We will try to bring those in our audience at least shortly, at least before the Deep Blue keem comes out. -- team comes out. We will of course be welcoming your comments and questions. And we're expecting them any moment now. I just wanted to see that one of the things that Garry did mention in his press conference, he preferred to it quite often, is he double-guessed his own opening work. He said that "Look, guys, no more Mickey Mouseing around. I want to play real openings. MIKE VALVO: I wonder who these computer experts were that he conferred with. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, of course we do know that Frederic Friedel was one of his most influential advisors. MAURICE ASHLEY: You have to go beyond that, though, Yaz. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Yeah, I think there were many. MAURICE ASHLEY: There were lots of statements Kasparov made that obviously could be taken different ways. There were a lots of hints and suggestions. AUDIENCE MEMBER: He didn't want them to be introduced. It seems he was very upset with his pregame preparation. MAURICE ASHLEY: But what about the statement that he's only been preparing for only for ten days? What's up with that? These people have been preparing for him for 14 months, and that was their only goal. The idea that he could only prepare for a match like this for ten days and then play those kind of openings. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Yes, again, poor preparation, I would say, in the final analysis by team Kasparov. The other thing that was very interesting, and it only started to come out as the press conference went on, and that was you're getting the idea that, hey, Miguel Illescas, Grandmaster from Spain, had been putting a lot of energy for IBM Spain. Joel Benjamin, they hinted, has a number of Grandmaster colleagues here in New York, and how much work did that group of people do. So it's tough. It's conceivable, it sounds like there was a whole group of Grandmasters. I must say that I honestly had nothing to do with Deep Blue's preparation. I always wanted to see Garry win this match and I'm just as stunned as can be that he hasn't, and the final result. MAURICE ASHLEY: Is it such a big deal that Grandmasters were helping Deep Blue? I mean it's teaching Deep Blue how to play better chess, so what's the big deal if they hire a few Grandmasters? MIKE VALVO: It's to be expected. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, I mean it's to their credit that they did. I must say that many chess computer programmers do not hire Grandmasters to teach their programs, they just have the programs do it all themselves. So it's an honor from the IBM research staff to go out and get expert knowledge. And of course it's in their interest to do it, but as far as I'm aware, they only do D it for the first time in Philadelphia with Joel. MIKE VALVO: One thing that struck me is that Garry just seemed to have a single strategy, play strange moves, try to get the computer out of book. You would think that he'd have an alternative strategy where he'd switch to some other approach, another type of an opening, another type of play, and he didn't try it once in the entire match. MAURICE ASHLEY: Didn't he say that he couldn't prepare his main openings as well because it was just a short match, and they didn't really have time to make these adjustments, and yet I hear that and I think that Kasparov has such an incredible repository of knowledge -- YASSER SEIRAWAN: Repertoire, yeah. MAURICE ASHLEY: -- yeah, and you're thinking, what? You can play almost anything. This is Garry Kasparov. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, first of all, two quick things. First, along with what Michael Valvo has suggested and what Garry Kasparov's overall strategy was for the match, I think also Garry was trying to get into endgames. The next thing is, let's accept Garry at his word. That game two shook him up so badly that he didn't seem to get control of the emotions thereafter. I don't know how he is sleeping, what have you, but one thing is for very, very sure, that loss was more than a loss. It devastated him. It set the tone of the match. He questioned the "hand of God," the intervention, he wouldn't let it up, you saw him very stubbornly cling to it throughout the press conference. So, yeah, he was very emotionally disturbed -- MIKE VALVO: Yasser, you've played matches against very strong players. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Of course. MIKE VALVO: Do you allow yourself to get that upset about anything? MAURICE ASHLEY: Yeah, I was about to ask that question in the sense of, why is it that when the machine does it, it's so much more unnerving? It's not like -- you know, you lose to one of your buddies, you might get upset, but you think okay, tomorrow I'm going to take care of you. In this case, it's like somehow it beat him, and now it seems like some kind of unstoppable force, and why is it such a ghost, almost? YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, in this case Garry clearly acted unprofessionally when he allowed his emotions to get the better part of him. I mean as a professional, he's been challenged in incredibly tense positions -- tense situations, I should rather say, and he's resolved them advantageously. He's won virtually every challenge he's ever faced, with this exception. So for him to allow this to distract him from the game was a very unprofessional, unwise thing that happened, and I can say for myself I'm stunned that he allowed it to take over the match for him. MAURICE ASHLEY: Well, we would sincerely like to apologize. The Deep Blue team in fact is not going to come for whatever reason, they have decided not to come on stage. We would like to thank you again for coming -- YASSER SEIRAWAN: Shall we take a question from our audience? MAURICE ASHLEY: And if you have further questions -- YASSER SEIRAWAN: We'll take two, and then we'll let you all get going. AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yasser, this is mainly towards you. You made the comment very early after the match was over that you're surprised at the computer winning, and was it expected, you didn't think computers were ready. And I'm surprised by the whole comment Garry -- I mean obviously with Garry's statements and everything. But when you have computers have been around since 1946, and the fact that they have programmed this with ultimate skill, using Grandmasters and funds and the ability which computers have today, to me it is not surprising at all. It is only a question of time and the time happened to be now. Humans make mistakes and computers don't make mistakes, they will make only mistakes if what they were programmed are mistakes. So the fact that they can analyze so many more ply and so many more moves ahead of what any one human being can do, it's really not all that surprising. Now, having said that, allow me just to say one more thing, is I don't believe that this has to be taken as a serious blow to mankind, because time has just come for this to happen, it's an event, it's a very exciting event, but the fact is that a human isn't facing another human who might be able to make a mistake, and I think that's all it is. It's just a great event. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Well, I will just say that I agree with you, the computer is a genius, but the question is has the time come? I think the time is coming. I think it shouldn't have arrived. The point that I'm trying to make is that Garry is a better chess player than Deep Blue is and that he lost control of himself during the match, he allowed himself to get disturbed, and he was very, very poorly prepared. And, yeah, I think there are a lot of other players in the world that could beat Deep Blue today. So I'm just saying that, yes, we know it's coming from 1946 onwards. It shouldn't have arrived this early. This is an early bird! This is an early bird. Question there, yes. And this will be our last question, and we thank you. AUDIENCE MEMBER: How did the six-game format come to arise? Because obviously Garry wasn't pleased with -- he wants Deep Blue to play competitive chess, and I guess it's ten games, or 20 games, or first to ten points. How did six games come about to be the point -- MIKE VALVO: This is part of the negotiations between IBM and Garry. This was last year's format. They just repeated it this year. I don't know the inside story why six was chosen, why eight or ten wasn't chosen. But I'm sure time is money, and that would have involved a lot more money. AUDIENCE MEMBER: And the second part is, with the match tied 2-2 -- I mean 2.5-2.5, why -- it seemed that there was a tremendous amount of coverage about the fact that there was a great deal of pressure on Kasparov to win this final match. What would have been the tragedy -- not the tragedy, but certainly the great to-do about drawing against Deep Blue? Why couldn't he have played an opening that he knew obviously a lot better than that. (Audience laughter.) To draw the final game in order to draw. MIKE VALVO: I think Garry took the pressure off of himself yesterday when he kind of said that everybody else is more concerned than he is. I forgot how he worded it, but he said he's just going to go and try to make good moves. But obviously the pressure did get to him. He couldn't shut it that easily. MAURICE ASHLEY: Well, I think the point is that at some point we're afraid that computers will do something that we think we're the only ones -- should be able to do. I mean we're intelligent. We like to think of ourselves as intelligent. The superior being in the universe, so to speak, although we don't know what else is out there. And to think that there is something coming along that may someday do something that we do and go beyond just computing and start to maybe intuit, to feel, to do these kinds of things that are supposed to make us uniquely human and put us in a central place in the universe, I think this is the big issue and maybe we just defined the question incorrectly, and so everything else becomes this battle, becomes more magazine nide than it really ought to be. I think this is what's happening for us, and maybe if we just accept that, look, it's just crunching numbers. It doesn't have a life, it doesn't have these thoughts and feelings, and we'd be all right whatever it does. YASSER SEIRAWAN: I'd just like to add one last comment, and that is, I agree with you, sir. Garry should have chosen an opening A, he was comfortable with, B, he didn't mind drawing, and yes, C, if the match had been a 3-3 result, kudos to both, you know, it's unresolved, and let's come again. So, yeah, that would have been a smart, wiser action, course of action, but at the end, Garry again said that somehow after this fifth game he had put a lot of energy to win the game, he didn't do it, and he's nervous, he's tense. Again, I don't know what it was. Maybe he wasn't getting sleep the night before, but he clearly after the game didn't look like a guy that was really himself. He looked just shattered, evidently. MAURICE ASHLEY: And showed human qualities. And we hope he'll show another human quality of fortitude and bouncing back in the face of lost. And he said it already, he's going to rip this thing apart when he sees it again. YASSER SEIRAWAN: Tear the thing apart. MAURICE ASHLEY: Tear it apart. That said, we have been here, and we'd like to thank you again. And the excitement is not over. Thank you very much.
Search the boards