Chess Champion Loses to Deep Blue

I’m feverishly flipping my Times (May 12) for the result of the final Garry Kasparov vs. Deep Blue. Man vs. machine. Humanity vs. the cold and calculating. Then I see it. The photo of Garry K., face buried pitifully in his hands. I fall back on my couch, dreams of human invincibility crushed.

How could this happen? Well, Blue took a minor advantage when Kasparov gambled with a greedy play at Move 11. Though experts would agree that at least a draw was possible, Garry inexplicably resigned. Quit! Later, at a news conference, he would lash out at IBM: “It was nothing to do with science. . . . It was zeal to beat Garry Kasparov . . . and . . . a big corporation with unlimited resources.”

Alas, as a human I’m desperately trying to muddle my way to a lesson here. To seize some hope. Could it be that a machine does not gamble greedily, throw resignation tantrums, or certainly not whine or alibi when it loses? But rather uses its brains and objectively, relentlessly pursues its goal? Just do its best? And never, ever quit?

Now, if you’ll excuse me. I’ve got to get to the phone to call in sick. It’s a nice day, and I’m feeling much better.

DONALD FUNK

Redondo Beach

Now they have a computer that can analyze 200 million chess moves in a second and can beat the world champion. Big deal.

I’ll be more impressed when they come up with a computer that recognizes the day after Dec. 31, 1999, as the first day of the year 2000, not the first day of the year 1900.

GEORGE KISEDA

Los Angeles

I followed the match between Kasparov and Deep Blue with great interest since I play computer chess on a machine, “Endorsed by Garry Kasparov--The World Champion” (Chess Computer MEGA 2050X).

I personally had doubt whether Kasparov could beat the machine judging, in part, from the number of defeats I’ve had to bear on the very smart computer.

I’m not necessarily happy that Kasparov lost or that Deep Blue won. I guess what gives me some pleasure is to know that even the champion of chess has now experienced the feeling we amateurs know so well.

On the day of Kasparov’s defeat I played with my youngest daughter. We tied after two games. Playing with her keeps me in touch with the human element in chess.

ERCELL H. HOFFMAN

Compton

“Searching for Bobby Fischer,” six feet tall, master of disguise, skilled in gamesmanship, analytical genius, i.e., who else, masquerading as Deep Blue?

FRANK L. BURKE

Los Angelesa