ChatGPT: who is the Chess GOAT?
Sort:
Is chatGPT tripping or did Capablanca have a son or something
Jan 22, 2023
0
#3
Well, Magnus is clearly not the GOAT according to chatGPT... But then it listed Capa as the third and the ninth, so would it know?
I do agree with Kasparov being the GOAT, though, with Fischer being a close second.
Boys .... you are not very Intelligent .... if you give these Rankings !!
Listen up please ....
First thing First ......
1) Admit one thing : Chess died , ... ceased to Exist .... in its truest meaning the DAY they invented chess software !!!
Admit this simple truth ... or you show your poor INTELLIGENCE !!
So around 1975-80 chess DIED or ended !
2) Secondly ...
Please understand that Different eras means different means to improve .... and MOST of ALL ... the possibility to Steal secrets FROM previous CHAMPIONs !!
so you cannot say MAGNUS Carles today would beat Morphy !
That is PATHETIC and ridiculous
That is not an intelligent statement !
You should say :
" If Carlsen had lived in Morphy ' era [Time]
He would have lost all the games .... without winning one and ONE ONLY !!
........
But let's stop this :
Here is a more likely Ranking [ not Perfect though ... and a bit arguable ! ] :
********* All-Time RANKING
1) [ Hands down no Doubt about it ] : Paul Morphy !
Why ??.... He retired because he had no competition even among the strongest players in the world !
Someone even thought He was not Human !
Imagine that his opening .... has not been improved by much even nowadays !!
[ was He human ?? .... I doubt it ! ]
2) Capablanca ....
why ?? .... In his entire long career he lost Only around 30 matches !
I can hardly Believe that myself !
3) Fisher
why ?? ...... He ALONE CRASHED the entire Russian confederation of GMs ..... led By Spassky ....... and was largely deceived .... by Russian GMs that were in league against him .....
Basically preventing him from even winning more TOURNAMENTS by secretly arranging draws among them and maybe granting points to their colleagues !
[...I mean losing on purpose to the Russian-GMs that were Neck to Neck with Fisher ]
4) Tal
He invented moves that even in year 2000 chess software was unable to find !!
{ Just to let you know Stockfish , Fritz , ChessMaster are software created upon TAL personality .... replicating his style his calculation power .... etc.}
5) Kasparov [ till 1980 at MOST ] or Alekin .
Why ? ..... I do not give you any explanation !
I just point out that Kasparov is nothing but a guy who memorized tons of moves suggested by a software !
He was by and large as good as Karpov .... before chess software killed the game !
Carlsen is not even a player !!
.... like everybody nowadays is a learner of the moves proposed by a software !
Kasparov was his master ... no wonder !
[ He did not create a single move !! ] ...BESIDES He knows that ! Kasparov Knows that !
...... They will not publicly admit that .... BUT in private ... yes !! .. they will admit what
every great chess player knows !!
Regards
P.S. {suggestion}
Do not Be silly ......
no modern chess player would be able to face TAL , Morphy or Capablanca ....
If there wasn't a PC at Home to show any possible move !
You are not good at chess guys !
You have a perfect player [ chess software ] that show you everything !
Imagine your level without it ! It would be simply PATHETIC .
Trust me .... admit it !
Fisher did not have it [ chess software ] .... Morphy did not have it !
They had to improve without it ! ......... and they did !! Incredible , uh ?
.... Now you understand how weak and hyped up
Kasparov and CARLSEN really are !!
[ they cannot be compared to real champions ]
To be fair to Kasparov, the vast majority of his career was without chess computers. Up to the late 90's chess computers were a joke as far as playing strength. Still he never rose above his peers like Carlsen and Fischer did.
jo90ways wrote:
Carlsen is not even a player !!
.... like everybody nowadays is a learner of the moves proposed by a software !
Carlsen isn't the best example of an engine-dependent player.
He's said (on several occassions) that when growing up, he didn't use chess engines. Though he did use databases - which are different things.
Databases are collections of human games, to look through and learn from. Just as Fischer loved to do with his chess periodicals.
Regarding engines as a whole, Carlsen is known for expressing his disinterest in them and their lines. When Maurice Ashley asked Carlsen, in a post-game interview, why Carlsen's play didn't align with the engine's top moves, Magnus became visibly annoyed, and demanded to know why Maurice seemed to think that engine-like play is the only viable way to win.
He's also called chess engines "idiots", and his seconds have commented that it's sometimes difficult to get Magnus to pay attention to their engine prep, because he'd rather get the general idea at a glance, then rely on his own calculation from there on out.
Better examples of engine players would be the more current generation of young SuperGMs - as they've grown up in the Stockfish era. Carlsen became a GM before Stockfish was even invented ... He's already part of the "old guard".
premio53 wrote:
To be fair to Kasparov, the vast majority of his career was without chess computers. Up to the late 90's chess computers were a joke as far as playing strength. Still he never rose above his peers like Carlsen and Fischer did.
What? Kasparov was world number one for two decades, the undisputed "boss" of chess. Even when he retired in 2005, he still had the world number one ranking.
Sad to see people trashing his reputation here because of ignorance or malice.
Lotus960 wrote:
premio53 wrote:
To be fair to Kasparov, the vast majority of his career was without chess computers. Up to the late 90's chess computers were a joke as far as playing strength. Still he never rose above his peers like Carlsen and Fischer did.
What? Kasparov was world number one for two decades, the undisputed "boss" of chess. Even when he retired in 2005, he still had the world number one ranking.
Sad to see people trashing his reputation here because of ignorance or malice.
I don't wish to disrespect Kasparov. He held the title for a long time and the number one ranking but I believe Carlsen and Fischer were in another world in relation to their peers that Kasparov didn't quite reach. All attempts to rank them are flawed in some way though.
Carlsen bruh
As a thought exercise, I asked ChatGPT to rank the best players of the world. Obviously its opinion is biased, although to what extent I'm unsure
. Regardless, here are the results of 3 different attempts:
1.
2.
3.
It seems to settle more on: