Match Kasparov - Deep Blue, New York 1997: decisive game and conclusions
In the summer and fall of 2013 in the newspapers The Guardian, The New York Times and The New York Post, I read about Matt Charman’s play “The Machine”, which tells about the match Kasparov - Deep Blue. Now, Matt Charman has become famous as the author (along with the Cohen brothers) of the original script for Steven Spielberg's film “The Spy Bridge” nominated for the 2016 Oscars. The play "The Machine" - about the dramatic epic battle of a man with a giant computer - was staged in New York at Park Avenue Armory. The performances were held from September 4 to September 18, 2013.
By 2013, I had already forgotten the score of the match, and how it went: I myself did not analyze the games, I had a different repertoire, as a theoretician I specialized in other principles. But he remembered exactly the victory of the IBM computer. Journalists trumpeted: The victory of artificial intelligence over the world chess champion! The machine beats the man! Computer is superstar! Milestone in the history of AI! Glancing at Wikipedia, I found that the match ended with a computer advantage of only one point 3.5-2.5, and the outcome of the match was decided in the last sixth game. This party and Wikipedia notesseemed strange to me. Kasparov quickly lost, commentators Vicki posed three questions for his moves 7 ... h6? 11 ... b5? and 16 ... Bc6 ?, and some experts said that instead of 8 ... Qe7 it was necessary to immediately take the horse. Has the world champion made four mistakes in 18 moves? I decided to deal with this and find out the truth, using both modern chess programs and my own, human understanding of positions using heuristics or general strategic principles of the game. I mainly analyzed using Houdini, sometimes, in some controversial situations, I used Fritz, Rybka or Stockfish.
So, before the 6th game the score was 2.5-2.5, and if the game ended in a draw, then the Man would have stood against the Machine. In the article “The Truth About the Decisive Game Between Deep Blue and Garry Kasparov, New York 1997, Game 6” on 10/20/2013 I answer the questions: How many mistakes did Kasparov make? Could he call the game?
Deep Blue - Garry Kasparov (2785) [B17]
1. e4 c6 According to the Mega Database, before this game with Deep Blue, Garry Kasparov played the Karo-Cann defense black 19 times (9 wins, 2 losses) from 1977 to 1982, white 28 times ( 15 wins, 2 losses) from 1976 to 1996. He remembered his youth. 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Ng5 Ngf6 6. Nd3 e6 7. N1f3 h6 Risky, but quite normal move for a player who knows all the nuances. I do not like such options, since I do not like to defend myself, it is more pleasant to attack. Although, if you study a month, you can play. Easier 7 ... Bd6.
8. Nxe6!The sacrifice of the horse is the strongest answer. Modern programs also choose this move. I suspect that Kasparov expected Deep Blue to retreat on e4, since computers rarely donated pieces in obscure positions in the 1990s. Now, in February 2016, I looked at the party logs at www.research.ibm.com/deepblue/watch/html/c.html IBM The Match. In the logs of the 6th game www.research.ibm.com/deepblue/watch/html/game6.log from 1 to 11 the move says “book moves”, which means that these moves are taken from the debut library. Kasparov did not suspect that the aggressive move was 8. Kxe6 was simply recorded in the memory of Deep Blue.
8 ... Qe7? Error. The decisive mistake in the decisive game. It is right to immediately beat the knight 8 ... fxe6, and, as analysis shows, Black has counter-chances in all variations. Although White has good compensation for the piece, if the game is correct on both sides, the game should end in a draw. In one of the last grandmaster games H. Stefansson - H. Grand Sunig, Reykjavik 2015 Black won in 18 moves.
Heuristic: In the opening, quickly develop your pieces. Based on the general principles, the move is 8 ... Qe7? also worse than 8 ... fxe6, after 9. Bg6 + Kre7 10. OO Qc7 11. c4 Kd8 Black can develop the kingside, leading the bishop and rook out into the open, after 8 ... Qe7? it's impossible. Why did Kasparov prefer 8 ... Qe7? Most likely, during home training, he did not seriously study the horse's sacrifice, thinking that Deep Blue would go 8. Ke4.
9. OO fxe6 10. Bg6 + Kd8 11. Bf4!
The winning move, as my research has shown. First used E. Geller in 1986 at the Chigorin Memorial in Sochi, defeating E. Meduna. White has a clear advantage in development, powerful elephants control the fields around the black king.
After watching the games of this option, I found that it was played by my Hungarian friends, international master Zoltan Šiklosi and grandmaster Peter Leko. Shiklosi defeated M. Nemeth in Lenk, Switzerland in 1990 after 11. Bf4. Leko chose another strong move 11. с4 and defeated G. Bakhtadze in 22 moves, Las Palmas, 1995.
11 ... b5 !? Kasparov is trying to activate forces on the queenside and plans to transfer the horse to the center. However, this and all other moves lead to defeat. 12. a4! Deep Blue is attacking!12 ... Bb7 13. Le1 Nd5 14. Bg3 Kc8 15. axb5 cxb5 16. Qd3 Bc6 The black king is in danger.
17. Bf5! exf5 The computer takes the queen. 18. Rxe7 Bxe7 19.c4! Again the best move: Deep Blue reveals the vertical for the queen. Kasparov gave up.
Answers on questions. Kasparov made only one mistake 8 ... Qe7. That was enough for the supercomputer, Deep Blue played well and defeated the champion. But if Kasparov immediately beat the knight 8 ... fxe6, then he could easily have called and made a draw in the game and match.
A bit of criticism. In Geektimes there is a post geektimes.ru/post/246086about the match. When a layman raises a topic, then he rewrites the main thing with others, adding all sorts of stupidity from himself. It can be seen that the person did not play chess seriously, never prepared for tournaments, did not analyze opening options. Almost from the first lines this post causes laughter. Reti's “extravagant” debut was 100 years ago. Until 1997, Kasparov used the “outlandish” double fianchetto system at least 11 times. In 1978 against G. Govashelishvili in Baku (1-0, 36 moves). In 1980 against B. Toro Sanchez in Dortmund (draw, 22 moves). In 1987 against V. Korchnoi in Brussels (draw, 51 moves), in the same place against G. Sosonko (1-0, 34). In 1987 against A. Karpov in Seville (1-0, 64 moves, match for the world title). In simultaneous games against B. Hund in 1988 in Basel (1-0, 63), in Cannes against M. Ulybin (draw, 40). In 1990 against N. Short in Paris (1-0, 59). In a simultaneous game in 1991 against A. Nunez in Galicia, Spain (1-0, 30 moves). In 1993 against F. Taylor Boud in London (1-0, 22 moves). In 1994 against Anand in New York (draw, 24 moves). Double fianchetto is outlandish only for neophytes who know one move - 1. e2-e4. As Vladimir Vysotsky sang: “Something familiar to me ... That's it!”. The debut of the 4th game is not the defense of Pirz-Ufimtsev, there must be a move ... g6, fianchetto.
An anti-computer strategy is to create a closed position with pawn chains so that long-term planning plays the main role. If the program counts 15 moves ahead, the implementation of the plan for transferring pieces can last 20 moves. A good example of an anti-computer strategy is the third game of the Kasparov-X3D Fritz match, New York 2003, on the Chess Siberia website. I write about the evaluative function and differences in the last chapter of my science fiction novel “The Bright Way” (from the words “Man and computer play chess differently”).
Garry Kasparov, 13th world chess champion. Photo © Boris Shchipkov, Novosibirsk 2005
1st party. Kasparov - Deep Blue 1-0 . Reti's debut. Kasparov played strongly, it was difficult for the computer to evaluate such positions, especially with two passed pawns.
2nd party. Deep Blue - Kasparov 1-0 . Spanish party. After a weak game in the opening and a strategic mistake, Kasparov lost counterplay. In the end, he made a mistake and Deep Blue, but Harry did not use the gift of fate.
3rd party. Kasparov - Deep Blue 1/2 . English beginning. Kasparov tried to take the machine away from the theory of the “extraordinary” 1. d3, but she took moves from the opening base until the 8th move. The horse in the center provided Deep Blue with approximate equality.
4th party. Deep Blue - Kasparov 1/2. Wrong start, protection of the Caro-Cannes with a loss of pace. The debut library, until the 7th move, after which Deep Blue recklessly closed the position with 9. e5 (humor: this is an anti-computer move), and Kasparov got a nice game. True, I would prefer 12 ... fxg6 !, immediately opening the line f. Deep Blue weakened his king by 26. b5 ?, but Kasparov changed his queens, then more precisely 35 ... Rff2! .. The endgame is a draw.
5th party. Kasparov - Deep Blue 1/2 . Reti's debut. Deep Blue exchanged the bishop for horse 4 ... Bxf3 simply because this move was in the debut library. The iron monster went to the endgame in vain, and Kasparov could defeat with move 44. Rg7 + followed by 45. g6. Then, Deep Blue, having calculated the four-way variant, confidently made a clear draw 47 ... Kb6. Kasparov lost his peace of mind.
6th party. Deep Blue - Kasparov 1-0. Defense of the Caro-Cannes. Kasparov stumbled in opening 8 ... Qe7, and Deep Blue quickly knocked out his opponent with heavy blows.
Deep Blue won the match against Garry Kasparov with a score of 3.5-2.5.
Deep Blue played no better than Kasparov, so there was no point in fighting the world champion in the IBM rematch, the result could be any.
Kasparov did not realize that Deep Blue had a huge debut library and a party database. Kasparov’s poor opening preparation is noticeable: 2nd, 6th games.
Kasparov did not understand why Deep Blue played with differences, made either a strong move or a weak one. But the explanation is very simple. Deep Blue for the given time can calculate the position, for example, 7 moves ahead. However, on the 8th move, the opponent has a powerful answer that refutes the version of the computer (for example, on the 6th move he takes a rook, and on the 8th he loses the queen). After the first move, Deep Blue notices this powerful answer and deviates to the side. But late, as the previous move was not the best, and perhaps even a mistake. For 7 or 8 moves, Deep Blue could not recognize the eternal check, so he chose 45.Ra6? in the 2nd installment.
Kasparov lost the match because he did not know how the chess program works, did not know that the opening library in the computer's memory could be very large, and also because of excessive emotionality and poor preparation.
By 2013, I had already forgotten the score of the match, and how it went: I myself did not analyze the games, I had a different repertoire, as a theoretician I specialized in other principles. But he remembered exactly the victory of the IBM computer. Journalists trumpeted: The victory of artificial intelligence over the world chess champion! The machine beats the man! Computer is superstar! Milestone in the history of AI! Glancing at Wikipedia, I found that the match ended with a computer advantage of only one point 3.5-2.5, and the outcome of the match was decided in the last sixth game. This party and Wikipedia notesseemed strange to me. Kasparov quickly lost, commentators Vicki posed three questions for his moves 7 ... h6? 11 ... b5? and 16 ... Bc6 ?, and some experts said that instead of 8 ... Qe7 it was necessary to immediately take the horse. Has the world champion made four mistakes in 18 moves? I decided to deal with this and find out the truth, using both modern chess programs and my own, human understanding of positions using heuristics or general strategic principles of the game. I mainly analyzed using Houdini, sometimes, in some controversial situations, I used Fritz, Rybka or Stockfish.
So, before the 6th game the score was 2.5-2.5, and if the game ended in a draw, then the Man would have stood against the Machine. In the article “The Truth About the Decisive Game Between Deep Blue and Garry Kasparov, New York 1997, Game 6” on 10/20/2013 I answer the questions: How many mistakes did Kasparov make? Could he call the game?
The decisive game of the match Kasparov - Deep Blue, New York 1997
Deep Blue - Garry Kasparov (2785) [B17]
1. e4 c6 According to the Mega Database, before this game with Deep Blue, Garry Kasparov played the Karo-Cann defense black 19 times (9 wins, 2 losses) from 1977 to 1982, white 28 times ( 15 wins, 2 losses) from 1976 to 1996. He remembered his youth. 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Ng5 Ngf6 6. Nd3 e6 7. N1f3 h6 Risky, but quite normal move for a player who knows all the nuances. I do not like such options, since I do not like to defend myself, it is more pleasant to attack. Although, if you study a month, you can play. Easier 7 ... Bd6.
8. Nxe6!The sacrifice of the horse is the strongest answer. Modern programs also choose this move. I suspect that Kasparov expected Deep Blue to retreat on e4, since computers rarely donated pieces in obscure positions in the 1990s. Now, in February 2016, I looked at the party logs at www.research.ibm.com/deepblue/watch/html/c.html IBM The Match. In the logs of the 6th game www.research.ibm.com/deepblue/watch/html/game6.log from 1 to 11 the move says “book moves”, which means that these moves are taken from the debut library. Kasparov did not suspect that the aggressive move was 8. Kxe6 was simply recorded in the memory of Deep Blue.
8 ... Qe7? Error. The decisive mistake in the decisive game. It is right to immediately beat the knight 8 ... fxe6, and, as analysis shows, Black has counter-chances in all variations. Although White has good compensation for the piece, if the game is correct on both sides, the game should end in a draw. In one of the last grandmaster games H. Stefansson - H. Grand Sunig, Reykjavik 2015 Black won in 18 moves.
Heuristic: In the opening, quickly develop your pieces. Based on the general principles, the move is 8 ... Qe7? also worse than 8 ... fxe6, after 9. Bg6 + Kre7 10. OO Qc7 11. c4 Kd8 Black can develop the kingside, leading the bishop and rook out into the open, after 8 ... Qe7? it's impossible. Why did Kasparov prefer 8 ... Qe7? Most likely, during home training, he did not seriously study the horse's sacrifice, thinking that Deep Blue would go 8. Ke4.
9. OO fxe6 10. Bg6 + Kd8 11. Bf4!
The winning move, as my research has shown. First used E. Geller in 1986 at the Chigorin Memorial in Sochi, defeating E. Meduna. White has a clear advantage in development, powerful elephants control the fields around the black king.
After watching the games of this option, I found that it was played by my Hungarian friends, international master Zoltan Šiklosi and grandmaster Peter Leko. Shiklosi defeated M. Nemeth in Lenk, Switzerland in 1990 after 11. Bf4. Leko chose another strong move 11. с4 and defeated G. Bakhtadze in 22 moves, Las Palmas, 1995.
11 ... b5 !? Kasparov is trying to activate forces on the queenside and plans to transfer the horse to the center. However, this and all other moves lead to defeat. 12. a4! Deep Blue is attacking!12 ... Bb7 13. Le1 Nd5 14. Bg3 Kc8 15. axb5 cxb5 16. Qd3 Bc6 The black king is in danger.
17. Bf5! exf5 The computer takes the queen. 18. Rxe7 Bxe7 19.c4! Again the best move: Deep Blue reveals the vertical for the queen. Kasparov gave up.
Answers on questions. Kasparov made only one mistake 8 ... Qe7. That was enough for the supercomputer, Deep Blue played well and defeated the champion. But if Kasparov immediately beat the knight 8 ... fxe6, then he could easily have called and made a draw in the game and match.
A bit of criticism. In Geektimes there is a post geektimes.ru/post/246086about the match. When a layman raises a topic, then he rewrites the main thing with others, adding all sorts of stupidity from himself. It can be seen that the person did not play chess seriously, never prepared for tournaments, did not analyze opening options. Almost from the first lines this post causes laughter. Reti's “extravagant” debut was 100 years ago. Until 1997, Kasparov used the “outlandish” double fianchetto system at least 11 times. In 1978 against G. Govashelishvili in Baku (1-0, 36 moves). In 1980 against B. Toro Sanchez in Dortmund (draw, 22 moves). In 1987 against V. Korchnoi in Brussels (draw, 51 moves), in the same place against G. Sosonko (1-0, 34). In 1987 against A. Karpov in Seville (1-0, 64 moves, match for the world title). In simultaneous games against B. Hund in 1988 in Basel (1-0, 63), in Cannes against M. Ulybin (draw, 40). In 1990 against N. Short in Paris (1-0, 59). In a simultaneous game in 1991 against A. Nunez in Galicia, Spain (1-0, 30 moves). In 1993 against F. Taylor Boud in London (1-0, 22 moves). In 1994 against Anand in New York (draw, 24 moves). Double fianchetto is outlandish only for neophytes who know one move - 1. e2-e4. As Vladimir Vysotsky sang: “Something familiar to me ... That's it!”. The debut of the 4th game is not the defense of Pirz-Ufimtsev, there must be a move ... g6, fianchetto.
An anti-computer strategy is to create a closed position with pawn chains so that long-term planning plays the main role. If the program counts 15 moves ahead, the implementation of the plan for transferring pieces can last 20 moves. A good example of an anti-computer strategy is the third game of the Kasparov-X3D Fritz match, New York 2003, on the Chess Siberia website. I write about the evaluative function and differences in the last chapter of my science fiction novel “The Bright Way” (from the words “Man and computer play chess differently”).
Game Match Briefs
Garry Kasparov, 13th world chess champion. Photo © Boris Shchipkov, Novosibirsk 2005
1st party. Kasparov - Deep Blue 1-0 . Reti's debut. Kasparov played strongly, it was difficult for the computer to evaluate such positions, especially with two passed pawns.
2nd party. Deep Blue - Kasparov 1-0 . Spanish party. After a weak game in the opening and a strategic mistake, Kasparov lost counterplay. In the end, he made a mistake and Deep Blue, but Harry did not use the gift of fate.
3rd party. Kasparov - Deep Blue 1/2 . English beginning. Kasparov tried to take the machine away from the theory of the “extraordinary” 1. d3, but she took moves from the opening base until the 8th move. The horse in the center provided Deep Blue with approximate equality.
4th party. Deep Blue - Kasparov 1/2. Wrong start, protection of the Caro-Cannes with a loss of pace. The debut library, until the 7th move, after which Deep Blue recklessly closed the position with 9. e5 (humor: this is an anti-computer move), and Kasparov got a nice game. True, I would prefer 12 ... fxg6 !, immediately opening the line f. Deep Blue weakened his king by 26. b5 ?, but Kasparov changed his queens, then more precisely 35 ... Rff2! .. The endgame is a draw.
5th party. Kasparov - Deep Blue 1/2 . Reti's debut. Deep Blue exchanged the bishop for horse 4 ... Bxf3 simply because this move was in the debut library. The iron monster went to the endgame in vain, and Kasparov could defeat with move 44. Rg7 + followed by 45. g6. Then, Deep Blue, having calculated the four-way variant, confidently made a clear draw 47 ... Kb6. Kasparov lost his peace of mind.
6th party. Deep Blue - Kasparov 1-0. Defense of the Caro-Cannes. Kasparov stumbled in opening 8 ... Qe7, and Deep Blue quickly knocked out his opponent with heavy blows.
Deep Blue won the match against Garry Kasparov with a score of 3.5-2.5.
To summarize
Deep Blue played no better than Kasparov, so there was no point in fighting the world champion in the IBM rematch, the result could be any.
Kasparov did not realize that Deep Blue had a huge debut library and a party database. Kasparov’s poor opening preparation is noticeable: 2nd, 6th games.
Kasparov did not understand why Deep Blue played with differences, made either a strong move or a weak one. But the explanation is very simple. Deep Blue for the given time can calculate the position, for example, 7 moves ahead. However, on the 8th move, the opponent has a powerful answer that refutes the version of the computer (for example, on the 6th move he takes a rook, and on the 8th he loses the queen). After the first move, Deep Blue notices this powerful answer and deviates to the side. But late, as the previous move was not the best, and perhaps even a mistake. For 7 or 8 moves, Deep Blue could not recognize the eternal check, so he chose 45.Ra6? in the 2nd installment.
Kasparov lost the match because he did not know how the chess program works, did not know that the opening library in the computer's memory could be very large, and also because of excessive emotionality and poor preparation.