A hypothesis about Chess vs. Go

Sort:
CounterSacrifice
NikkiLikeChikki wrote:
So saying making any judgments about one set of players vs another is silly. It’s like saying calculus is more demanding to one set of monkeys than algebra is to another set of monkeys. Both sets of monkeys are in way over their heads.

I love this way to put it! grin.png

Baduejoe

To be honest both games are great and i would advise everyone who likes strategy games to give go a chance if he hasn't already. Main difference between those games is the abstraction, chess is easier to understand since you have different kind of pieces and a clear objective while in go you need to surround territory which can be achieved in an unimaginable amount of different ways which results to people getting lost. Also go is less formulated because it is(was) hard to point out which moves were bad while in chess it is a lot easier(not talking about uber complicated variations which ofc both games have but more in the spirit of in chess you do a mistake you lose a pawn, a piece etc while in go you make a mistake now and by the time the mistake manifest it is already lost in 30 more moves) 

Now on topic neither game is more complicated than the other in my opinion but go is harder to learn since there were not many teaching tools like widely available engines and also memorization of moves doesn't play that big of a part, in chess there are openings that can carry you to the end game while go opening ends in about 5-9 moves(or less).

 

PS:Go is way more ancient than chess(aprox 2500 years old), opening theory on go got revolutionised around the same time that chess did but AI had a greater impact on go because moves in go are harder to judge, emanuel lasker which holds the longest reign as world champion had some very interesting quotes about go such as 

"While the Baroque rules of Chess could only have been created by humans, the rules of Go are so elegant, organic, and rigorously logical that if intelligent life forms exist elsewhere in the universe, they almost certainly play Go."

wylktah71

I have no idea about Go but it seems to me that Chess is more evolved now simply because it's more popular and therefor there are more people going deeper in the game and I think that that is the only thing that matters. If it's the opposite (Go being more popular), my bad. My point is: chose any game and go deep/evolve at it. I don't really think that the appearance, names and rules of the game matters. The holy magic is not carved on ancient texts, it's in your very relationship with the game.

greghunt
wylktah71 wrote:

I have no idea about Go but it seems to me that Chess is more evolved now simply because it's more popular and therefor there are more people going deeper in the game and I think that that is the only thing that matters. 

...

You seem to be suggesting, based on popularity, that football is more evolved than chess.  

NotWyvernxx

All I see here is a bunch of Chess noobs thinking Chess is the best game in the world. Stupid fools. All of you probably never played Chess, so you don't know how hard it is. The difference between Go and Chess is like Heaven and Earth. It is incomparable.

CounterSacrifice
NotWyvernxx wrote:

All I see here is a bunch of Chess noobs thinking Chess is the best game in the world. Stupid fools. All of you probably never played Chess, so you don't know how hard it is. The difference between Go and Chess is like Heaven and Earth. It is incomparable.

What were you trying to say?