Have Computers Ruined Chess?

Yes and No,

Chess engines helped advance opening theory when they are used within moderation and limits they make great training tools but they have a dark side to their power if a player isn't very careful he or she can become a slave to them long term their game will suffer badly.

chess is over

If a computer plays chess against a person (eg. Deep Blue) that has ruined the game. However 'computers,' in the form of chess.com, the Chessmaster series, Fritz etc. have improved chess and improved chess players' chess.

Hope you can understand that.

Disagree. They have nor ruined chess... Computers gave us more opportunities to learn, practice, play with distant friends, help us analyzing our games...

I think the advance of technology in the field of chess has helped more than it has hurt chess. Ofcourse it does have its downside as anything else does. The recent cheating going on at the World Open and other otb events is one of the downsides. The cheating which takes place by those using strong programs to play their games on the internet is another example of the downside. I think it also creates a crutch for many players who use strong programs to "analyse" their games and they never learn how to analyse for themselves. There is also the temptation to spend too much time playing on the net now and not studying chess which means less progress I believe without the necessary time spent studying. I believe if the net had existed when I started playing ( 1972 ) I would never have broken 2200 because I would have spent too much time playing and not enough studying the game. However, at that time and in a small rural town in Georgia I had noone to play chess with and could only play a few tournaments a year which meant I spent the vast majority of my "chess time" actually studying the game.

Yes. Back in the day, Capablanca predicted that top-level chess would, with the advancement of theory, inevitably get into "draw death". Fischer considered  normal chess "stale" and only wanted to play Fischerandom in his last days.

Nowadays, the vast majority of grandmaster games are drawn. This is largely due to chess engines, which have contributed massively to endgame theory and routinely beat humans at analysing positions. Computers are a major cause of the notorious "grandmaster drawing" problem.

garry showed the world ( and the computer ) THAT THEY ARE NOT KING!

   time wise, pressure, emotion...  edge given to computer

   but over all with unlimited time I DON'T think the world best computer could

take garry in 1 on 1 chess over a long period play.  random or not@

     As far as the average person well YOUR NOT garry so who cares~

   if your not 1# in the world nobody things you great right!  LOL!

     Chess if a groth sport, one with averages, rankings, kinda like bowling.

are we gonna give up bowling once a computer bowls 2 = ( 300 games? )

or holds a really good average like 256 or something?  PRESS ON HUMANS,

CRUSH COMPUTERS!

Computers are good an bad for chess yes both at the same time.The bad is it has in my opinion hurt the turnout to your local chess club.In the mid 90s even here on the mississippi coast we used to have about 20 chess players turn up on tuesday night an around 30to35 on friday nights at  a Macdonalds fast food joint now we are luky to have 3 or 4 show up its to easy just to playonline.Also on line sites has killed a lot of good chess magazines such as inside chess.Computer chess engines are now the true world champs esp at speed chess this is somehow very sad.      Now for the good if i was 19 an not a old 49 year old chess player i would have been a much stronger player as when icame up it was hard to find good strong players to practice against.Now with online data base an the good tutorial programs like chessmaster an ct art 3 a young fresh mind can get as good as they can be.If bobby Fischer had lived his first 15 years in most other areas he would not have had the large group of good players to play,Now with the internet an computer chess engines the next Fischer could come  from the  north part of Alaska or Mississippi.Plus its so much fun so to me  I find it good an bad but it think the good wins out.

Computers have shown the way. Many opening variations that were considered too dubious to play in the past, turned out to be playable after computer analysis.

Think of variations with early g2-g4, that sort of thing was considered unpositional in the old days, nowadays there are many variations where it's played (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 Nf6 4.Nc3 Nbd7 5.g4!?). People only started trying moves like this after computers came up with the idea, not burdened by dogma.

At the top levels of chess, the variety of openings and strategies used is far greater than every before.

Computers have enriched our game!

computers have not ruined chess!

computers can play better, drive faster, hit harder, aim better and will generally win in everything you enter them in. if this also happens to be true for chess then so be it, we just won't let them play.

overall, yes :)

chess engines have made chess more beautiful. It is engine+human combination which produce the most beautiful and deepest chess, not engines alone.

Did photography ruin fine arts?

You do not believe that. If you do, perhaps someone should tell you about this site called Chess.com ...

Reb's points are on the mark. It's not whether they exist, but how they are used. Used properly, chess engines and computer managed "books" (databases) have a positive impact.

Cameras did not ruin finbe arts, but extended them to new areas. Writing and reading did not eliminate the need for memory and block all learning, but opened up new areas of knowledge and discovery. Engines and databases extend the possibilities of chess.

By facilitating certain tasks, computers have freed me to work harder on strategy and a greater range of openings.

Computer software did destroyed chess online.

Though, computer software do help us to improve our learning curve.

Thanks God, there is Chess otb and that's a different story!

Chess Greetings, Tony

Computers can ruin professional chess.

But chess will stay forever as intellect gymnastic.

 I couldn't have put it any better myself! Computers are excellent companions for improving your games. I swear by HIARCS.

Being 57 it took me a little time to get into the whole "internet thing"  and such.  I think the computer technology greatly helps one learn and improve at chess.  I can practice my openings against the computer etc.  With sites like  chess.com i can play the game with others around the world without ever having to go out to live tournaments/play.  Thus when playing chess online i don't have to be as concerned about personal hygiene, or dressing up.  The computer/ online chess doesn't care if i haven't showered or shaved.  The Luddites opposed technology, I think the computer pluses outweigh the negatives overall...I really continue to be in awe of the technology that allows chess.com.....what else did we get from the Roswell crash??? but i digress...

Is there any sense of discovery anymore? Is there a sense of accomplishment? Is there any money in chess? Is there any pride? Maybe there's some. But not like other sports.

In basketball, you'd kill for Lebron James' or Kobe Bryrant's secret insights into the game. In (American) football, you'd love to get inside the Manning's heads (well not really Eli but still). In poker, you'd love to get some secret tech from Daniel Negreanu and Doyle Brunson.

Would you kill for secret tech from Anand? Maybe. But serious players are more interested in what Rybka, Fritz, and HIARCS have to say about their games than Kramnik, Topalov, and Kamsky have to offer!

The numbers are down. Fewer children are picking up chess as a serious passion, which means no new blood into the game.

Maybe the game was a lot better when Fischer and Kasparov were all over the media, drawing crowds, inspiring generations of new players, and competing for millions of dollars.

Maybe the game was better when people idolized Capablanca and Morphy, and other seemingly invincible players. Maybe the game was better when Tal challenged the conventional wisdom of chess with amazing sacrificial play.

Maybe the game was better when it was dominated by Germans or Russians. Okay maybe not . . .

But still! Yeah sure engines are a great tool to challenge yourself with. They improve your game by leaps and bounds. They are fun. But maybe the game we all know and love would be healthier if there was some mystery and intrigue left in it, rather than being boiled down to an exact and precise science. I'm just saying . . .

How can something like a computer ruin something so perfect like chess.  not in a million years.  in any case it made it better.  now anyone can learn openings and how to play the game on his own.  computers are hard to beat but once you do is very rewarding.

When computers are stronger than the best of humans various issues are raised. Is the world championship between computers more important than the world championship between humans? Are grandmasters to laughably persist with their second-rate games while computers smugly sit there superior? Should the grandmasters somehow utilize the awesome power of the machines in their contests? How? etc, etc.

For normal players (nearly everyone) both machines and grandmasters are in a different league speaking a different language. It needn't affect us how good computers are any more than how good grandmasters are.