Humans vs. Computers

• FM krstulov_alex
• | Mar 29, 2014
• | 14899 views
• | 43 comments

Many peoples think, the computers are better than humans. Today I want to speak about that, because I think not! Think a little bit. We (the humans) made the engines, that was one thing, why humans are better.In the next game (I follow in video) the human beat the computer with checkmate! Let's see how:

Nice or not?

Next: one time, I solved a diagram (endgame diagram) and checked with computer. The computer say a variation, the end is +5. But why? I follow the diagram:

Why is it +5? The computer can mate with 1 knight? Okay, that's to hard for me. In the next position, I want to check my analysis. I want to check a sacrifice. You can see the diagram.
So, okay I want to analyze Nh7, but first I want to see, what will computer do. Rybka: think 7 minutes and says:1.Bd2. Okay, I close Rybka. Now I check with Houdini: after 1,5 minutes Houdini wants to play 1.Nxh7 with +1.17. I put this move for Rybka and Rybka also says: that was a good move. Yes Houdini founded in 1,5 minutes. >>BUT<<! A normal chess player without thinking play Nxh7, because after Kxh7 he/she plays Qh4 and on Kg8 white can play Bg5 and threatening with Bf6 exchange the bishops and then Qf6 Re3-h3, or threatening to take the e7-knight.
If some people now also think, the computers are better than humans, see the next position:
In this very popular position, I take the Rybka, what he wants to do? Everybody knows, the g5 move. The Rybka 27 times put away the g5 move. I say OK, I close Rybka. At last 28th time Rybka says: g5!. That costed Rybka 11 (!) minutes. I think Botvinnik founded this faster...
And one other thing, what I think, that was the most impotant: the computers positional play is around zero. They can calculate very well (not every time), but positionally somitimes make horroble moves.
Think first, and after use engine, because sometimes, the human is better then the best computer engine of the World!

• 9 months ago

Computer crushes everyfink! But so what, we can still play chess, no need to prove or disprove anything.

• 9 months ago

I really enjoyed this article! Please write more about your chess experiiences with computers and other things. Thank you!

• 9 months ago
[COMMENT DELETED]
• 9 months ago

what the heck is it with all these people saying that the author is drunk and/or writing a stupid article with no purpose whatsoever. firstly the author is 11 years old and secondly if you are saying that why are you reading it? are any of you a FM at 11? keep up the good work.

• 9 months ago

Skully, some observations: since GMs aren't playing against computers in tournaments anymore (please see my previous post), their rating is just a result of inflation, because there are so many games played between computers automatically (see the specialised sites). So, computer ratings cannot be compared to ones of GMs. Plus, when someone plays against a computer, he/she doesn't usually access a huge database and endgame tablebases, so he/she is handicapped.

• 9 months ago

I love the game of chess! However, I have a killer Windows computer with 8 cores, 32 GB of memory at 3.8 GHZ and the Houdini (4) 64 bit chess engine. It will bring ANY Grand Master to his knee's with the smallest mis-calculation anywhere during a game (openings, middle game or end game). Best you can hope for is a draw playing a PERFECT game. That's why Kasparov quit playing computers... they've gotten better and better until you can only be embarassed when playing one. Yes, there are still some things that you can take advantage of while playing a computer but to find them is a "needle in a haystack" preoccupation. Computers are good for analysis but to play one??? can kill one's ego really fast. Plus they are getting better every time a new game enters their database. So in the future their ELO rating will go to 3500 plus. Today Houdini 4 64 bit rates at about an ELO of 3250... the best human Grand Master rates at just above an ELO of 2900. But chess programs will benefit from computer speed, number of cores and vast amounts of historical games saved in their databases. Good luck on besting a computer... how about a nice game of TIC-TAC-TOE?!

• 9 months ago

Exactly! Even an amateur such as myself, recognizes the limitations of computers. Check out my latest blog:

http://www.chess.com/blog/OldChessDog/of-cans-and-computers

• 9 months ago

VERY good point GoatsRUs! Maybe that's why GrandMasters didn't want to allow computers in tournaments anymore since 2000 (if I remember corectly).

• 9 months ago

Computers are way stronger than humans. Its not really open for debate. I enjoyed your article and it is good that you made a case for mankind being the best. At least we play chess, computers number crunch! Thank you and good luck with your chess career. You are already very talented and can only improve.

• 9 months ago

I killed   1988 in a king indian attack in a rapid game!

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game?id=765581973#

I gave him sac. PC can kill you in an open position, but they can not underestand the danger of a closed pawn chain KID.

• 9 months ago

No one ever mentions it, but computers violate the rules of chess by having reference material to look at. I mean the best computers are using table bases, opening manuals AND end game tables. The human is not allowed to use an opening manual and an end game table but the computers are?

And becuase of the above you can not really look at computers as playing according to the rules of chess.

• 9 months ago

Can Humans retain their creativity but acquire the nerves of steel of the machine? That would be the day. I think Magnus Carlsen is close to that but he's perhaps the first of this new evolved type of Humans.

• 9 months ago

I agree with you when you say that "sometime, the human is better then the best computer engine of the World!". But that's all. Only sometimes, probably 2 or 3 times out of a hundred. You must know some facts: even the best GM's can no longer beat the best chess engines. Only very rarely this can happen. Those engines are all rated above 3000 elo points. Some are rated above 3300!!! Do you have any idea of what this means? This is huge, kid. it's silly of you when you say that "Many peoples think, the computers are better than humans.". People don't think; they know it because it's a well-known fact.

• 9 months ago

awesome!!! keep writing more articles please!

• 9 months ago

can computer do philosophy? Please I dont believe there is such a computer Nietzsche.

• 9 months ago

The kid is 10 years old, rated over 2000 FIDE and writes articles. Beautiful!

• 9 months ago

I really enjoyed reading this article and your last one, and I really appreciate that you take the time to write them for us. Thank you thank you thank you.

• 9 months ago

I appreciate you writing an article for us Alex, but I must agree with some others, this article is extremely hard to understand, mainly because of errors in the text moves etc. Try proof reading next time! Thanks

• 9 months ago

Is it drugs? Is it alchohol? Is drugs a alchohol? Guess we will never know.

• 9 months ago

One thing everyone should know about how chess engines works.
In every chess software there is evaluation function, this is the very heart of the engine. the evalution software do one thing - it look at a chess board position and should give the evaluation (who is better and by how) without any calculation, just by a set of rules determine apriority. this is a very heavy task  and of course can lead to miss judgment specially in endgames.