Yes! He's the best player in the history of the world and machines don't know how to plan. He can steer the game into channels where human thinking trumps brute force calculation. While he can't calculate nearly as fast a an engine engines have a horizon effect of 20 moves whereas Carlsen can see deeper than that, resulting in a more accurate assessment.
Not trying to diss the guy, but how on Earth could Carlsen see deeper than an engine?
I understand the difference between the human thinking and pure engine, but there's no human that can see 20 moves deep.
Alekhine sometimes looked 30 moves ahead as shown sometimes in his best games collection.
There is absolutely no way that anyone can look 20-30 move deep.
10, I can believe, but even that is extremely rare.
If you're talking 20 move deep, you're talking thousands of lines and variations.
No human can see that.
If you give them a pen and paper and a few hours, fine, I'll buy it.
But not without those.
In endgames it perfectly possible do calculate down a line 20 moves ahead, but it's only due to the very limited number of moves available.
And each time you decide to exchange a bishop for a knight and to cripple your opponent pawn structure, you are looking twenty moves forward - of course, this doesn't mean that you have calculated every variation.
So we're talking about different stuff, then.
I understand that looking into 10-20 moves is possible if the moves are limited and are forcing (endgames or mating nets).
But an engine sees all lines and variations at any position.
This is what a human will never be able to do.
And this is exactly the reason why human player can still be a tiny bit better than computer in some positions : because, contrary to computers, they don't need to calculate every line to play a good move.
).
for sure humans have a better undestanding of the requirements of a position than computers thats for sure