It's a good bet that by the time all the chairs are stacked away again 'DeepFritz' will be joining his little brother at the bottom of that big blue wobbly thing that mermaids live in.

Here is a glimpse of the man who goes to battle for us all. (yes, even for programmers )

Vladimir Kramnik

quote:

---

It wasn't completely one-sided. Fritz fought back and shocked Kramnik with some typical computer tactics. In the press conference he admitted that he never imagined 27…Bc4+! and the tactics that followed. "Only a computer would find and play something like that," Kramnik said, "I was completely shocked."

---

Below you will find in-depth coverage.

Scroll down to find the full annotated game as well.

here

[ October 07, 2002: Message edited by: flotsom ]

better link

Vladimir Kramnik is an oddity, even in the rare world of chess grandmasters, where quirks and eccentricities are neither.

from the guardian

Solid links with info and annotation of world champion Kramnik's vanquishing of former world champion and fifteen year tutour Gary Kasparovhere

A great link:

2.5 to 0.5 for Vladdy.

Today it took the world champion 51 moves after an aggressive opening. (Scots)

Play resumes tomorrow.

3 to 1 for vladimir kramnik.

Annotation on Javascript board for:

game one

game two

game three

game four

(annotation and commentary by Grandmaster Karsten Müller)

The world of competitive chess is quite a bizarre one. Or so I concluded after reading a Granta piece about it a few years ago, written by (I think) Julian Barnes. It was when the world championship was being held in England, and an English grandmaster, for the first time in living memory, had a chance of winning. He didn't, but anyway.

It has a vigourously animated metre, dunnit?

Like a heavy object landing on a tight rubber surface only to spring away again.

A medicine ball?

"Buh-bump...ba...raaiinn."

*elbow inadvertently depresses the 'Brixton Button'*

"Suffink loi 'at."

Ooops.

I believe there are variations of chess and proto-chess games that avoid the obvious and overtly military-like and potentially spirit-crushing competitiveness of chess (Arabian shatranj for example) that I also find repelling, and object to, strongly.

The game innevitably degenerates and falls into this hyper-competitive, martial-linear mode due to the presence of structural errors that rob chess of its potential for elegance.

For one example, the basic rook and king moves are simple and elegant, then the rules for castling intrude like extraneous points and lines in a geometry proof.

There are no less than five pawn rules.

Elegance, in the case of chess, is sacrificed for the sake of drama.

Too often the drama takes these essentially violent overtones, and all that this sets into motion that you alluded to, and for these same reasons I no longer enjoy to play.

Chess is, however, undoubtably, a game of compelling drama, hence this thread.

But chess is far from perfect.

The game of GO is perfect.

That's a whole other thread.

Games five and six have not boded well at all for the silly human and the score now stands tied, at 3 points apiece.

Game five