chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Jens Kristiansen vs Deep Blue (Computer)
"Forever in Blue-Jens" (game of the day Feb-23-2022)
Copenhagen (1993), Copenhagen DEN, rd 1, Feb-??
Bishop's Opening: Vienna Hybrid (C28)  ·  1-0

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Get this game explained with Decode Chess
explore this opening
find similar games 1 more J Kristiansen/Deep Blue game
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can get computer analysis by clicking the "ENGINE" button below the game.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE.  [CLICK HERE]

Kibitzer's Corner
Jul-02-17  mnsek: gg human
Feb-23-22
Premium Chessgames Member
  An Englishman: Good Evening: Deep Blue looks like it could not find a plan in the major piece game after 21...Qxf6 and played much too passively.
Feb-23-22  Jamboree: This brings up an interesting question:

When was the last time that a human player defeated a computer program playing at full strength?

In the '60s and '70s, chess-playing computers were laughably weak. Starting in the '80s, the best ones could play at Expert or Master strength. In the '90s they started getting very good, and by the '00s the top programs were all GM-level. By the 2010's they were nearly unbeatable, and by now (2022) the top ten computer programs are all rated 3400+ and are essentially unbeatable (by humans). At some point we crossed a threshold where computers became impossible for even the top humans to ever defeat. But when was that moment? It seems to have passed without anyone taking notice. Was it Kasparov beating Deep Blue in Game 1 of their 1997 rematch? Or...when?

Surely no human these days could beat a 3500-rated Stockfish or Komodo or Fritz. I'm not talking about situations where the computer is intentionally "dumbed down" to make it an even match, or situations were there is a glitch, or a program playing on insufficient hardware, or ultra-fast time controls -- I'm talking about a top-20 program playing at full strength on the latest hardware under classical tournament conditions. When was the last time any of these lost to a human?

Feb-23-22  SkySports: <Jamboree: This brings up an interesting question:

When was the last time that a human player defeated a computer program playing at full strength>

If you don't consider (as I understand) rapid and blitz games, I'd say this victory of Ponomariov vs Fritz in 2005: Ponomariov vs Fritz, 2005

Feb-23-22  goodevans: <An Englishman: Good Evening: Deep Blue looks like it could not find a plan in the major piece game...>

Interesting how our tendency to anthropomorphise stretches to computers.

These beasts aren't even capable of recognising a simple move transposition (see the discussion in Vitiugov vs J van Foreest, 2020) so clearly they don't 'plan' anything. Anything they come up with that resembles a plan is a product of what we overlay onto their calculations.

Feb-23-22
Premium Chessgames Member
  Troller: <When was the last time any of these lost to a human?>

Depending on how gullible one is, there is also: Adam Celander

Feb-23-22
Premium Chessgames Member
  LRLeighton: This doesn't entirely fit Jamboree's criteria, but in 2005, Arno Nickel, who is a correspondence GM, crushed Hydra, the world's strongest chess program at the time, in a correspondence match 2.5-0.5. This result was largely ignored, but Nickel had argued that the strength of computers was not in their brute-force calculation, but rather in their speed and endurance. A human couldn't possibly keep up with a super-computer in a classical game because a human wouldn't have time to calculate all of the variations. But Nickel's argument was that in a correspondence game, a strong human would have time to find the correct moves (Botvinnik had believed that the rise of computers would force humans to play slower, not faster, but apparently nobody else got the message). And at least in 2005, Nickel's argument appeared to be valid.
Feb-23-22
Premium Chessgames Member
  LRLeighton: To be fair, Nickel was allowed to play as a centaur, specifically, he could use chess software that he could purchase over the counter. So he bought a $60 package of Fritz, which at the time, was weaker than Nickel was. So it's unclear how much Fritz helped him with his analyses.

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

<This page contains Editor Notes. Click here to read them.>

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Bishop's Opening: Vienna Hybrid (C28) 1-0Stone fence break thru
from Hostilities on the h-file hit Fredthebear by fredthebear
Bishop's Opening: Vienna Hybrid (C28) 1-0Stone fence break thru
from Bee Bop Bop Bop goes Fredthebear by fredthebear
Curious King Traps (not easily forseen)
by Zorts
Bishop's Opening: Vienna Hybrid (C28) 1-0Stone fence break thru
from Hostilities on the h-file by mneuwirth
Deep Blue resigns
from Puzzles by Raleigh Naturalist
kormier's favorite games
by kormier
0ZeR0's Favorite Games Volume 14
by 0ZeR0
February 23: Forever in Blue-Jens
from Game of the Day 2022 by Phony Benoni

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC