I've been doing that, however some of those games are so far above my head that I can't understand why Kasparov does some things. Furthermore, while deep blue may have been the ultimate number cruncher, computers these days tend to have a few more human attributes. In fact, I've heard that Fritz is known for one of the few computers to play "strategically." How do modern programs compare to Deep Blue's programming? If a modern program could be put on Deep Blue's machine how would it fare? Are there books (I'm sure there are) that analyze Kasparov vs Deep Blue that could help me here? I'd love to learn how to beat a machine. I know that there's no sure-shot way, and that they will always be tactically superior (except for programming flaws) but there must be some anti-computer strategies one could use to give himself a head start. For instance, here's a game Hikaru Nakamura wins against Crafty... http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1480850
He simply grinds it out with that long pawn chain.
Here's another against Rybka -- the human knows that the bishops are worth more than the rooks in this game. The computer seems to not realize that. http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1497429
It's definitely doable, even if only by top-level gm's. But I'm sure there are people here who have had some success. Surely CC favors the human as compared to OTB.