Where did the author say that MCTS alone is enough to beat Go? His point was that in Go MCTS seems to significantly improve results (which is true), while for s

Where did the author say that MCTS alone is enough to beat Go? His point was that in Go MCTS seems to significantly improve results (which is true), while for some other games this isn't the case. Therefore an algorithm which strongly relies on MTSC (such as AlphaGo) might not generalise to other games. I don't see anything wrong with this. AlphaGo uses MCTS precisely because it has proved to be effective in Go, at least compared to other search heuristics. It seems perfectly reasonable that a similar approach won't work with other games. Any single component of AlphaGo (like the policy network) can't consistently win against 9p players by itself, but it doesn't follow that those components aren't "effective" or aren't critical to the success of AlphaGo. It fact it is obvious that the opposite is true.