Thief 1,
Definitely machines are better than humans at calculating. No doubt. Chess has a mathematical side.
However, I am more interested in the human side, the struggle between two wills, and also in the aesthetic or artistic side of chess. The appreciation of beauty, the feelings of a human soul, the computer has no way of replicating.
Computers have an unfair advantage in that they can consult their own internal database; it is in this respect that the fight is unfair. They also do not have a complex spiritual/emotional/mental/physical system, like humans do. Therefore chessgames between humans and machines are unfair, and of no interest to me.
It is beautiful they play chess.
If they have the WORST pawn structure in the world, they will still evaluate it because they know there could be something hidden there, where a human would reject the idea due to asthetics.
And I don't like playing against computers, they are very good and I don't like to lose. Although if I lose, I'll probably learn why I lost. Against a computer, its because I overlooked some tactic, or hung a piece.
And in the games I don't lose pieces, I don't understand why I lost. In a natural position, I make one normal move and lose. After I go over the game with a computer, it evaluates the position as losing, but I don't know why, and the position doesn't have to be tactical for this to happen!
Some people here try to explain to another that using a machine to correct your weakness in positional aspects could look a bit crazy, exactly similar to the people only playing the 1 minute games as a drug and getting actually a final rank of 1275-1350, like me, except that I play also slow games and don't use a computer to help me to believe I'm a reincarnation of Fischer. But, you know, arrogance can easily take the place of intelligence or philosophy, no big deal. Sometimes, we just don't get it. due to Ego.