4 ms·

I followed the recent championship matches on chess24.com and was blown away at how compelling and engaging computers have made the game. There was a chessboard

I followed the recent championship matches on chess24.com and was blown away at how compelling and engaging computers have made the game. There was a chessboard on the screen with the current board state and a computer analysis on the side estimating which player had the advantage and by how much. While waiting for players to move, I was able to test out my own ideas on the board of which moves I thought were best and see what the computer thought of them (every move I made pretty much threw the game to the opponent). After losing to Deep Blue, Kasparov came up with the concept of "Advanced Chess," where players team up with a chess program of their choice to augment their play. At the time, a chess program with a computer coach was still superior to a chess program alone. That didn't last long, but I think Kasparov was on to something and I would love to see students paired up with open-source chess programs for tournaments that blend chess-playing proficiency with computer-programming.

mindgam3 8y ago
Completely agree that Kasparov was on to something with Advanced Chess. The first iteration of the idea failed to gain traction but that was more due to cumbersome tech (players staring at desktops playing slow games, not much of a spectator sport) than to the idea itself. I’m prototyping some ideas in this space with a team of hackers/chess enthusiasts. Ping me if interested in contributing or beta testing, contact info in my profile.
- jobigoud 8y ago
  I think it has been shown since then that for modern computer chess engine the human member of the centaur team is always detrimental. It's strictly superior to systematically ignore the human suggestions.
  - mindgam3 8y ago
    Interesting, I'm not aware of this but conclusively shown, but please provide a link to back that up as I'm certainly curious. That said, if you do centaur blitz or bullet chess using over the board pieces, not computer move input, I'm fairly certain that the skill of the human player will be a factor :-)

mindgam3 8y ago

Completely agree that Kasparov was on to something with Advanced Chess. The first iteration of the idea failed to gain traction but that was more due to cumbersome tech (players staring at desktops playing slow games, not much of a spectator sport) than to the idea itself. I’m prototyping some ideas in this space with a team of hackers/chess enthusiasts. Ping me if interested in contributing or beta testing, contact info in my profile.

jobigoud 8y ago
I think it has been shown since then that for modern computer chess engine the human member of the centaur team is always detrimental. It's strictly superior to systematically ignore the human suggestions.
- mindgam3 8y ago
  Interesting, I'm not aware of this but conclusively shown, but please provide a link to back that up as I'm certainly curious. That said, if you do centaur blitz or bullet chess using over the board pieces, not computer move input, I'm fairly certain that the skill of the human player will be a factor :-)