Could a current top player beat the same DeepBlue that beat Kasparov?

Could a current top player beat the same DeepBlue that beat Kasparov?

Yes. They have the latest Correspondence Database. Kasparov did not have that luxury during the match.

@ryan121 said in #21:
> Could a current top player beat the same DeepBlue that beat Kasparov?
>
> Yes. They have the latest Correspondence Database. Kasparov did not have that luxury during the match.

well I guess the op should make more precise the conditions of competition. Does a human carry the whole database in live memory? or is that database really covering.

Is it the computer being human tested or its algorithm. The heat here is loosening my synapses. might be missing some point(s).

Deep Blue Program and Algorithm is Very Inferior to the latest Stockfish engine. Stockfish on cheap smartphone easily beats Deep Blue on last century Super Computer. Contemporary Top GMs in top form can beat Deep Blue if his program isn't upgraded. Human GM can get an advantage of +/- 1.0 pawns after 20 moves. Deep Blue does not have endgame understanding like Stockfish unaided with EGTB.

@WorldRenownPatzer
Engines aren't correct either. They falter in blocked positions and fortress positions. So, one cannot say that engines are superior. So, engines cannot be used to test human strength. After all who created computers? Humans only, so biggest strength is human mind. So, only humans can better analyse games by own instead of engines.
And chess isn't dart, it involves lot of thinking! Even a laymen guy can compete against top dart player but a laymen is nothing in front of top chess player! How come you compare them? It's an insult to chess.

@Akbar2thegreat said in #24:
> @WorldRenownPatzer
> Engines aren't correct either. They falter in blocked positions and fortress positions. So, one cannot say that engines are superior. So, engines cannot be used to test human strength. After all who created computers? Humans only, so biggest strength is human mind. So, only humans can better analyse games by own instead of engines.

That's like pole vaulting from one coast to the other. If you can show me a human that can withstand the engine to get to these blocked positions and fortresses, then maybe you have something. Until then, keep polishing that pole.

> And chess isn't dart, it involves lot of thinking! Even a laymen guy can compete against top dart player but a laymen is nothing in front of top chess player! How come you compare them? It's an insult to chess.

I agree. So when Tal made a bad move that the opponent didn't counter correctly, that doesn't all of a sudden make it a brilliant move. The win doesn't substantiate a "top chess player". They just didn't know it at the time that it was unsound.

@WorldRenownPatzer
I have already explained before at Lichess how current players are weaker than players of older eras. And I don't need to further say anything since I have proved my point at Lichess and at other social media as well.
You are nothing but just a poor chess fan of modern players. Be like yourself and when you grow up you will learn reality and understand your wrongs.

@Akbar2thegreat said in #26:
> @WorldRenownPatzer
> I have already explained before at Lichess how current players are weaker than players of older eras.

I have not seen a convincing argument for this. Current players at the same playing level (titled tournaments vs. club players at a coffee shop) are much stronger.

>And I don't need to further say anything since I have proved my point at Lichess and at other social media as well.

If I had such convincing proof, I would frame it, take a photo, and share it. Do you have a link?

> You are nothing but just a poor chess fan of modern players. Be like yourself and when you grow up you will learn reality and understand your wrongs.

Ok, have fun living in the past.

@WorldRenownPatzer
You are new to Lichess ask others same question (current players vs players of older era) to those who are at Lichess for quite time or search forums with relevant keywords and you will find the answer (that older era players were better) in those threads.

@Akbar2thegreat said in #28:
> @WorldRenownPatzer
> You are new to Lichess ask others same question (current players vs players of older era) to those who are at Lichess for quite time or search forums with relevant keywords and you will find the answer (that older era players were better) in those threads.

This account is new, but I am not new to Lichess. If anyone has proof that "current players are weaker than players of older eras", then post the proof on a website and link to it. That's all it takes.

@WorldRenownPatzer said in #29:
> This account is new, but I am not new to Lichess. If anyone has proof that "current players are weaker than players of older eras", then post the proof on a website and link to it. That's all it takes.
Hello sir,
Such things don't have proofs rather arguments.
Read the arguments of all posts of this thread:
lichess.org/forum/general-chess-discussion/can-the-lichess-community-answer-this-please-fabi-or-karpov?
There Sarg0n was saying your words and few others including me were saying opposite. Also see number of likes and dislikes on those posts.
It may well tell you something.