World Chess Champ Says Computers Ruined Chess

[Hornbein]

Dominant player Magnus Carlson has quit classical chess partly because preparation demands too much memorization of computer-generated lines. The resulting game favors a long series of draws. "I know I'm better but can't get enough advantage to get a win."

Nowadays he only plays either the various versions of rapid chess where he can play an unusual opening or Fischer Random where the opening placement of the pieces is randomized, rendering extensive memorization impractical. The ruling body of chess tried to wipe out Fischer Random by banning "their" players from such tournaments, but appears to have given in.



Even in rapid chess his boredom is obvious. To make it a challenge he resorts to gambits such as deliberately showing up late in order to give his opponent a time advantage.

 

[dextercioby]

Chess has always been a part memory, part skill/genius, but now it's ridiculous. 30 years since Kasparov traded games with Deep Blue. Ffw 29 years later and the charm is gone

 

[martinbn]

Dominant player Magnus Carlson has quit classical chess partly because preparation demands too much memorization of computer-generated lines. The resulting game favors a long series of draws. "I know I'm better but can't get enough advantage to get a win."

Nowadays he only plays either the various versions of rapid chess where he can play an unusual opening or Fischer Random where the opening placement of the pieces is randomized, rendering extensive memorization impractical. The ruling body of chess tried to wipe out Fischer Random by banning "their" players from such tournaments, but appears to have given in.



Even in rapid chess his boredom is obvious. To make it a challenge he resorts to gambits such as deliberately showing up late in order to give his opponent a time advantage.

This is a few years old.

 

[dextercioby]

It may be old, but the issue is still present. He's best player in the world for more than 10 years, but retired from World Championship play.

 

[martinbn]

It may be old, but the issue is still present. He's best player in the world for more than 10 years, but retired from World Championship play.

Fisher also was the best at the time and retired. A new thread on that!

 

[sbrothy]

Yeah, or Philidor, the master of pawns (albeit from another time). I find it a little suspicious that Magnus Carlson stops playing chess using computers as an excuse not long after he was beat by that youngster where he claimed foul play. I was always under the impression that grandmasters were good because they recognized so many positions that they almost always knew what should be done in any given situation. The "being able to look 5 moves ahead thing" never really convinced me. But I see how the former (well the latter too to be fair) is hard against a computer.

 

[loop quantum gravity]

Boohoo, spoken like a true LOSER.



Anyways, if in a perfect game anyways one side always wins or there's always a draw; the best you can do is keep drawing or find another game that is not solved yet.
But that's always true of any game, btw.
I suggest to Magnus to try learning mathematics for its own sake or also theoretical physics. It's quite enjoyable to solve something by yourself instead of letting someone else's solve it for you...

 

[martinbn]

Boohoo, spoken like a true LOSER.



Anyways, if in a perfect game anyways one side always wins or there's always a draw; the best you can do is keep drawing or find another game that is not solved yet.
But that's always true of any game, btw.
I suggest to Magnus to try learning mathematics for its own sake or also theoretical physics. It's quite enjoyable to solve something by yourself instead of letting someone else's solve it for you...

Clearly you know nothing about chess, nor about Magnus.

 

[sbrothy]

Boohoo, spoken like a true LOSER.



Anyways, if in a perfect game anyways one side always wins or there's always a draw; the best you can do is keep drawing or find another game that is not solved yet.
But that's always true of any game, btw.
I suggest to Magnus to try learning mathematics for its own sake or also theoretical physics. It's quite enjoyable to solve something by yourself instead of letting someone else's solve it for you...

I suspect he's on the spectrum. Every chess player with a high ELO-rating I've ever encountered was on the spectrum. Some of them couldn't even tie their own shoelaces.

Nah, I'm joking.

 

[oracle99]

This is a long running debate. If you play chess, checkers, connect4, etc as entertainment, either with human or computer opponent, then it doesn't really matter if computers can beat you, or if the game is "solved" or not.

I have written checkers (and chess) engines/programs, going back to 1981 on an 8k PET!

I remember Chinook beating checkers champion Tinsley, and "solving" the game with 8 piece endgame databases. We now have 12 piece dbs.. The world champions of these games now avoid computer tournaments!

Checkers had 3 move opening ballot long before the advent of strong computers, playing free style had just become a memory contest.

I knew Derek Oldbury (World checkers Champion), he made a similar point about 3 move, it just became a contest of remembering long lines to defend weak positions when you have the weak side, rather than an enjoyable creative process.

Chess is still played seriously, but I think probably the arcade action type games have done more to kill humble hobby games like chess, checkers, etc.

For those interested, my checkers programs (old & newish) are free/open source, here:
https://github.com/orac81/Orac-Draughts

 

[Muu9]

I wonder if Go will become the new strategy game of choice - even post-AI, top Go play is not as memorization intensive as Chess