On Facebook …
Jonathan Tisdall: Does [Nigel Davies’ plan to revive competitive chess] include going back in time and preventing chess engines?
Jacques Delaguerre: You think engines are bad, wait until IBM Research builds a full-scale quantum computer which solves chess.
Jonathan Tisdall: Not sure how much worse that will be. We know it’s a draw and we can’t cope with how much is solved already unless we cheat.
Jacques Delaguerre: Quite true, grandmaster. Well, it’s just a game and it lasted 1,000 years. Perhaps the video gamers will one day realize that the triumph of chess was its minimalism and abstraction and build a game for the modern age which rivals Chess in beauty.
Jonathan Tisdall: On a more practical note, would Fischer360 or whatever its called, buy us more time or will the machines solve that more or less instantly?
Jacques Delaguerre: F360 is more combinationally complex, but not immensely more so than standard chess. Shogi is more combinationally complex than chess and a little farther back w/r/t the engines. How’s your shogi?
Jonathan Tisdall: I love shogi, prefer it to chess as a game. But life is too short…
Alex Fishbein: I’m not in favor of turning to other games just because chess has been either fully or partially solved. On the contrary, I believe that chess is more interesting to play because truth is easier to find in theory while humans would never be able to solve it over the board in any event. Anand was quoted expressing this viewpoint, I agree, and I believe that many other top players agree.
Jonathan Tisdall: I basically agree, though I confess I would prefer truth being mysterious, and not listening to amateurs who think they possess it because they can.
Computer exhaustion of chess can never exhaust it for the human mind, since we can’t absorb it all. The answer may be “42”, but what was the question?
For some perspective on the contrast between abstract mathematical solution of chess and the human experience of chess, consider a puzzle from the Baghdad era of Chess, circa 1000 CE, composed by Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Yahya al-Suli, a study not definitively solved until modern times! It uses the ferz piece which is like a bishop that only moves one step.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . k . . . . . . . . . . . . . K F . . . . . . . . . . . . . f . . . . . . .
White to move and win by capturing Black’s ferz (capturing opponent’s last piece without losing one’s own being a win at that time). For the solution, visit John’s Chess Playground.