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
"From the NBC studios in Burbank, the Tonight Show with Jay Len
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
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
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
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
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
And before you answer, Garry Kasparov has seated himself at the
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
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
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
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?
MAURICE ASHLEY:  I mean he's up a piece for a pawn.
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
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
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.
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.
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?
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
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
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.)
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?
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?
MAURICE ASHLEY:  And next to him is also the champion of ridge
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?
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?
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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.
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.
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
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?
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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
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
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.
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
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
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:  We're seeing some incredible reactions by Garry
  Kasparov.  He really is an unhappy camper.
MIKE VALVO:  Well, there's some interesting things from
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?
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
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.
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
(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
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
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
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
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
MONTY NEWBORN:  We'll take three more questions from the
(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
  hidden 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
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
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
(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?
(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
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
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
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
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
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
MIKE VALVO:  Do you allow yourself to get that upset about
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
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,
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