If you look at the last wc match between carlson and anand, you can see that the psychological component of the game was a major deciding factor. This is something that computers will never be able to do. They can calculate checkmates sure, and even imitate the chess tactics/statergy, but by very definition a computer will never be able to *play* chess, and so i wouldn't worry. As a bynote i will add that i taught another kid how to play over facebook in the space of about an hour last night. Winning chess, is only half of what makes chess great!?
Is Chess Finally Dead?
Sort:
As long as checkers is around, chess will have nothing to fear.
Perhaps i shouls expand on the point i made finally. Winning chess is only half of chess. A computer can calculate to infinity, but it cannot play with grace or humour or mercy. For the beginners, it must surely seem that computers have it all under wraps. But they CAN NOT PLAY CHESS?!? When i taught this lad how to play yesterday, was this chess not as important than any other speed chess/club chess going on across the net at the moment. Children are the future and a blessing, and spending real time playing real games with them, is something that a computer will never be able to do. So as a result game over. Computers can never play chess so stop worshipping them!
May 27, 2014
0
#67
john2054 wrote:
Perhaps i shouls expand on the point i made finally. Winning chess is only half of chess. A computer can calculate to infinity, but it cannot play with grace or humour or mercy. For the beginners, it must surely seem that computers have it all under wraps. But they CAN NOT PLAY CHESS?!? When i taught this lad how to play yesterday, was this chess not as important than any other speed chess/club chess going on across the net at the moment. Children are the future and a blessing, and spending real time playing real games with them, is something that a computer will never be able to do. So as a result game over. Computers can never play chess so stop worshipping them!
thankyou chessmate. computers are amazing however only capable of calculations using the data supplied from the actual play/games of chess players. The MMPI, MInnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory is an example of this type of satistical analysis and one of the first efforts to use this satistical analysis methods. The test formulated at the U of Minnesota in the late 1930's/1940's has 500 plus questions. It was intially formulated by asking..say..a control group of individuals with a diagonosis of "schizophrenia" these 500+ ?'s. using this data from ? answers then cross-referencing/correlating/trial and error the MMPI was fromulated on "How" these groups answered. if you read the test...i administered the test many times to indivduals who for one reason or another couldnt read it...you would be struck by seeming meaninglessness of the questions in regard to one's personality or personality disorder. the brilliance in the test comes from this seemingly random meaninginglessness. the MMPI is use today and has been improved upon the addition of the number of cases and improved case sharing/reporting. its my understanding that the "chess engines" have at their disposal millions of OUR games. like stated an amazing tool but lacking imagination.
AngeloPardi wrote:
Back in 1617 (!) a chess author named Carrera thought that chess was to simple, and that it should be made more complex by adding two new pieces.
The death of chess has been pronounced a few time already :
In the end of the 19th century, people were complaining about Steinitz style.
Capablanca thought that chess was too simple. Then came Alekhine
In the 50's, people thought that chess was dying because of draws. Then came Tal
In the 60's, people thought that chess was dying because of draws. Then came Fischer, Larsen, and Korchnoï.
Fischer said that chess was dead.
Then came Karpov and Kasparov.
Finally, then came deep blue, stockfish and Rybka and with them creativity in chess died...RIP
Alberturkey wrote:
AngeloPardi wrote:
Back in 1617 (!) a chess author named Carrera thought that chess was to simple, and that it should be made more complex by adding two new pieces.
The death of chess has been pronounced a few time already :
In the end of the 19th century, people were complaining about Steinitz style.
Capablanca thought that chess was too simple. Then came Alekhine
In the 50's, people thought that chess was dying because of draws. Then came Tal
In the 60's, people thought that chess was dying because of draws. Then came Fischer, Larsen, and Korchnoï.
Fischer said that chess was dead.
Then came Karpov and Kasparov.
Finally, then came deep blue, stockfish and Rybka and with them creativity in chess died...RIP
Great idea: bump a dead (no pun intended) thread in order to post a dumb cliché.
Chess is not dead nor will it be in the far future. If it is ever to die it will be approporiately replaced by "go". I see nothing to worry about.
And a forklift can beat the worlds strongest man, should we stop the olympics since we have invented forklift?
May 20, 2015
0
#73
To be honest I like the current type of chess that's being played at the top level these days. The other NM at my club agrees it's very fresh and guys are actually mixing things up and making it interesting, mostly avoiding drawish lines. He said games were more boring 20-30 years ago (his heyday). I've watched almost every 2700 classical time control game that has been played this year, and i've enjoyed it a lot.
May 21, 2015
0
#74
Herebrocker wrote:
drspudnik - i wear clothes - even in summertime when it is hot - i respect some psychological problems many people have with their and other bodies and sexualitie - i make allowances - but that does not mean that i confirm with every extreme problem with sexuality - your comment is obvioulsy an expression of such a problem. its interesting - subsession leads to obsession - perhaps this is the reason why the biggest porn industrie was made up in a country with the biggest subsession and biggest problems about that theme - usa.
What a delightful non-sequitur! And it's baloney too. By your logic, the largest porn industry should be in Saudi Arabia or some such. But it is funny that you interpreted my three word reply as something related to a sexual hangup. Go on...
While I still have something to learn, it wont be dead.
Chess will be dead when everyone who plays it has memorised every possible game that could be played... 
This thread is just completely ridiculous. Of course chess isn't dead. Was it dead the last three hundred times someone made a thread asking this?
I still wonder how Carlsen or other Super GMs would fare against Stockfish if they
1) Had unlimited time controls
2) An Analysis board to try out lines before moving
3) Access to databases/books/ etc
After all the strength of computers is that they technically have all three of these advantages available to them virtually. That puts a human player already into an unfair position.
One reason why I don't think computers are really "better" at chess is found in Go. So far even the best Go program was able to only draw a 9p even after it was given a 9 stone advantage.
May 21, 2015
0
#80
Herebrocker wrote:
DrSpudnik hat geschrieben:
Herebrocker wrote:
drspudnik - i wear clothes - even in summertime when it is hot - i respect some psychological problems many people have with their and other bodies and sexualitie - i make allowances - but that does not mean that i confirm with every extreme problem with sexuality - your comment is obvioulsy an expression of such a problem. its interesting - subsession leads to obsession - perhaps this is the reason why the biggest porn industrie was made up in a country with the biggest subsession and biggest problems about that theme - usa.
What a delightful non-sequitur! And it's baloney too. By your logic, the largest porn industry should be in Saudi Arabia or some such. But it is funny that you interpreted my three word reply as something related to a sexual hangup. Go on...
in saudi arabia men can have more than one wife - so what?
"stopp it" "go on" - you really like the imperative lol - typicall american.
We're making great progress here. Now let's see why you attribute certain things as "typical" of Americans?
"NotAGM wrote:
Conspiracy theorists know that chess is dead, and has been for a long time. We are all being kept in the dark about it - too much money at stake, the computer industry, FIDE even (some whisper) Chess.com itself.
The truth is that chess was killed by the discovery of ultimate winning opening line, a line against which there is no possible defence.
The story is that such a line does exist and was first discovered around 1896 in Berlin. The young challenger repeatedly beat (some say) Lasker, others that it was Stienitz. In truth no one is sure who it was. In the end the young upstart explained the opening line. The champion studied it for a long while. He realised that chess was dead, that his living would be over, his next move was to kill the young challenger and destroy all evidence of the line.
If you rediscover the line for yourself you will immediately be granted the title of grandmaster. It will be explained that you must make none sensical moves in pre-arranged games to obscure the secret and should you ever be foolish enough to reveal it..."
Who is Adolph Hitler
Ahh, so the truth comes out about that obscure Martial Arts sect in the Himalayas huh? Any one of them could beat Kasparov blindfolded with pawn and move.