Did IBM cheat when Deep Blue played Kasparov?

[HEyHEY]

I was just watching a show on it. I was at first thinking, "This is just typical Russian whining" (Anyone who watches hockey knows what I mean). But then when they said IBM stock went up 15 per cent after the victory and that the computer was dismantled right afterward so there would be no rematch, I started to wonder.
What do you think?

[Burma Jones]

1. What would have constituted Cheating?

I mean, it's kinda hard to cheat at Chess......if people are watching...or are we talking about having a Grandmaster in the Box?

[AllegroRondo]

4. Not exactly, but there are actual rules for computer chess

there is even a tournament for chess computer programs.

"cheating" would mean things like tweaking the code between matches or even during a game; or adapting the code to work better against a specific person or other program. The idea is that IBM did not design a chess program, but one specifically designed only to beat Kasparov, and against any other Grand Master it probably would have lost.

[patcox2]

2. How would they find someone who could beat Kasparov?

Fisher? Seriously, noone would have been better than the computer.

[TheBaldyMan]

3. There is quite a lot of controversy about the alterations to the code

that apparently didn't happen at all after day one and the complete change in style was a coincidence.

The team of Grand masters that were advising the Deep Blue / Deep Thought team didn't advise them about anything either.

One thing is certain. If IBM had left it on it's day one setting it would have got its little silicon butt kicked around the room.

[Yatar]

5. Hell yeah

Same principle behind the "voter irregularities"...

[asthmaticeog]

6. Paper Ballots NOW! Hand Count NOW! Checkmate NOW!