Chess.com novice tries to think like a computer but (surprise) still can't beat Magnus

He got absolutely massacred. Missed one move tactics.

I was thinking almost the same thing. All eleven tasks an average person could probably do within a year or two of training, and some maybe in a month. The 12th one the average person could never do in a lifetime. I wonder what made him choose one task that is so unreasonable compared to the other 11.

I don't think he had much idea of how complicated chess is. It's not something you get pro at in a month, or a year, or even 5 years, much less as an adult. Honestly, I don't know why he thought he could come up with a algorithm to beat Carlsen (does he really think he can literally be an engine?)--in a month, no less. If it were that easy, Carlsen wouldn't be WC.

And what's more, the 40 pullups he did, technically speaking, weren't proper pullups--you're supposed to go all the way down and then all the way back up.

Correct. He reached a level of play which might be below average on chess.com.

As was pointed out in the article, the reason is that chess requires a lot of knowledge and experience, by contrast with solving Rubik's cube in 17 seconds which takes no more knowledge than could be written in a chapter. The latter is still an impressive achievement, but he wildly overestimated his chances of success playing Magnus: if he had started as a better player, he might have been less unrealistic. The idea that he could find a set of rules to play chess like a computer likewise revealed a striking level of naivety: I have seen crackpots do the same in the forums here!

Good for Max and Magnus.  Pretty cool experiment.

Max didn't resign after dropping a piece, which tells you more about his level of play than the blunder itself. Congrats to Magnus for managing to keep a straight face.

in my third ever game I beat a 1800 elo player and in my 5 th I drew with a 1816

I beat the player by thinking like a computer and looking at every possibility for 4 moves ie 8 plies

I also limited my opponents options by stopping first his knights then his bishops then his rooks

er can you read my other posts explain, a 1800 is pretty strong I am currently a 1700 elo in English national ratings and I can often beat computers now.

out of my last 10 games against mephisto master dedicated computer chess board rated 2300 fide I got 3 wins 3 draws and 4 loses

Challenge for November, prepare:

1) Ranch-Seasoned Roast Turkey

2) Roasterd Garlic Butter Cream Mashed Potatoes garnished with bacon bits and coriander 

3) Green Bean Casserole with celery and fried shallots 

4) Honey Maple Roasted Carrots 

5) Spiced Cranberry Sauce with Orange Anise

6) Caramelized Onion Stuffing with Apples and Sage

7) Roasted Turkey Gravy

8) Wild Mushrooms gravy with peppers 

9) Dark Chocolate Bourbon Pecan Pie

🤓

Yes, but that kid's ability is obviously far superior to what most people with perfect pitch could do.

Did you take that test he used on his final day?

Perfect Pitch Test

third tournament game maybe. 

Good for you, but I'm pretty sure there's a big difference between Magnus and an 1800.

lol

Challenges for 2018

January - Lose the weight I put on between Thanksgiving and New Year

February - Make a margarita so good that my bartender friend asks me the recipe

March - Learn how to put tire chains on

April - Get my cat to not jump on the kitchen counter anymore

May - Get my chess.com blitz rating up to 1500

June - Get my girlfriend in California to move in with me

July - Get a story published in the New Yorker

August - Secure my garbage bins from raccoons and bears

September - Identify every senior citizen discount in the area

October - Harvest an epic cannabis plant (legal in Oregon!)

November - Catch a 40 pound Chinook salmon

December - Solve a simple unsolved math problem like the Twin Prime Conjecture 

Nah. They're both chess players.

There have been some great responses to this including the following thought:

Instead of studying and playing chess for years in order possibly to face a great player, all I needed to be was arrogant and brash enough to claim that I could beat Carlsen with only one month's training. 

Did anyone actually play through the game? The Wall Street Journal completely misrepresented the game itself. The protagonist, who does not deserve to be named, was never winning the game as the WSJ suggests and was completely lost by move 14.

And yes, I could have beaten this guy, almost as quickly! I certainly would have found the tactical errors that Carlsen did in the first few moves. Carlsen destroyed this guy.