Nobody is suggesting that this "mystery" person beat Kasparov by him- or herself. Who was this mystery person who (.) was able to defeat Kasparov? So to answer your questions I will direct your attention to number 3. Your idea of how IBM didn't cheat is however based on a misconception about how such deceit would take places. You are spot-on in reviewing the documentary. It does what it seeks to accomplish - dramatic film making. And further I'll assure you that I don't intend to use Game Over as credible source. how a human plays?ĮDIT I: Thanks guys, I had no idea they had released the logs. In your experience as chess players, do you think Kasparov would be qualified to make this judgement? Or in similar terms, do you think its possible to differentiate how a machine (even the advanced ones) plays vs. Kasparov mentioned throughout these games that he saw, "deep intelligence and creativity in the machine's moves." He was of course suggesting that IBM had cheated and that humans were intervening at critical moments, but that is aside the question I want to pose. I've become increasingly convinced that IBM cheated, but I want two types of your thoughts as well. I've researched everything everything I feel a cursory google search can offer, and I've seen the "Game Over" documentary. Please continue to give us your feedback and suggestions on how we can help make /r/chess better for everyone. Use the message the moderators link if your posts or comments don't appear, or for help with any administrative matters. Twitter/Facebook posts must contain a direct link to the tweet/post, and include the author's nameĬhess Spoiler format for problem answers etc., Instructions for /r/chess PGN addon ( Chrome, Firefox)ĭon’t engage in abusive, discriminatory, or bigoted behavior.ĭon't ask for advice about ongoing games.ĭon’t spoil tournament results in submission titlesĭo not use /r/chess exclusively to promote your own content. News Puzzles Games Strategy Twitch Other Resources