if v anand plays against computer on chess genius engine ,will he win?

Question

if vishwanathan anand plays against world's smartest chess software chess genius and on ibm's latest computer and let's say he sets difficulty level to the toughest one ,will he win?

Answer 1

Hello;



Interesting question ... the short answer is Vishy will win in a match. He would lose some games and he would win some games (and there would be draws), I think that overall he would win.



Vishy is a great player ... he has a wonderful approach to the game. I think that he would be able to learn enough of chess genius' flaws to win. Of course a lot depends on time controls and such.



The time will come when machines will beat human (World Champion players) but I am pretty sure that time has not come yet.



Gens Una Sumas,



Bill

Answer 2

I believe that humans can expand their knowledge on virtually anything, computers rely on humans to operate their opening database. But what if one person has the knowledge to surpass that database?



I believe Vishy would win if he tried his best, he is the world champion after all. Anand has won against many of the world's top players: Vladimir Kramnik, Garry Kasparov, Magnus Carlsen, Vesselin Topalov, to name a few. And he has improved his opening, middlegame, and endgame strategies as well. If Anand was to play the best computers in the world, he would obviously give it his all, which, let's face it, is probably better since the last world championship match. He defended his title, surely he could win in an all-out man vs. machine match. Oh, and I don't think IBM would have the knowledge to develop a new chess engine anyway, all the top engines nowadays have been Rybka, Fritz, and others, and they all have surpassed anything IBM has ever created... So even the chances that IBM will create something new is very slim.



And when computers get smarter and better at chess, there will always be one human to defeat it in a formal game. That's what makes humans so great, we have the ability to improve our knowledge and our understanding of the game better, and one way or another, the new champion will always be stronger than the old.

Answer 3

It is unlikely that Anand would win, or even draw such a match.



The last matches of world-championship caliber players against top computer engines have seen a 4-2 loss by Kramnik in 2006, 3-3 and 2-2 draws by Kasparov in 2003, a 4-4 draw by Kramnik in 2002, and a 3.5-2.5 loss by Kasparov in 1997. These were all played on standard (or outdated in the 1997 case) hardware at the time, so with the strongest current program and strongest available computer today, it can be assumed that the human's task will be considerably greater than it was even in 2006. It's worth noting, also, that Anand lost a 10.5-7.5 match to Kasparov in 1995, won a 6.5-4.5 match with Kramnik in 2008, and is currently about even with Kramnik in rating -- so there's nothing to suggest that Anand might be significantly superior to these other players who were taking up the computer challenge near their prime.



In my opinion, a key thing making these human versus computer challenges unfair is the computer's opening book, which is a database of prepared opening moves. It is true that a human world champion has memorized many opening lines, but he is not allowed to come into the match with a huge opening reference library. Given the brute-force strength of today's computers, they should play without any opening book at all. In that case, I would expect a human of world-champion caliber to win such matches with scores around 4-2 for the next five-ten years, then draw 3-3 for five-ten years, then finally succumb to the brute force of the machine.



Also, when you say "smartest chess software chess genius" I assume you mean the best current chess software, and not the specific engine Chess Genius, which would not fare nearly as well.

Answer 4

NO



Computers are increasing in strength all the time, they are relentless and never make mistakes, and the often made claim that computers can't win at chess is redundant, over.



They are calculating much deeper and longer then ever before. They are being programmed to recognize all the tricks.



We would not allow a fork lift, or crane to compete against humans, in the Olympic weigh lifting championship, so in a similar way, no human alive can complete against a fully configured computer.

Answer 5

of direction, yet will it rather is as relaxing or intimate? probable no longer, yet what if the laptop IS the one you love when you consider which you do not have a human one? could it rather is an identical enjoying on yet another laptop?

Answer 6

yeah..why not?

human created the machine..