3 ms·

That's hard to answer because the advantage is essentially infinitely large. Engines never lose or draw against unassisted humans. Any modern chess engine, if i

That's hard to answer because the advantage is essentially infinitely large. Engines never lose or draw against unassisted humans. Any modern chess engine, if it plays 100 games against any human (even magnus), will have a record of 100 wins, 0 draws, and 0 losses. This is true both in standard chess and Chess960.

nilslindemann 8mo ago
This is most definitely wrong. There will be some draws and even a few wins, though that's very rare indeed.
- School-Cotton 8mo ago
  When is the last time a human has beaten a computer in a fair chess game?
  - nilslindemann 8mo ago
    A fair match has never been played between humans and computers. Let's say we have a fair match: * 100 games, to have some statistical relevance. * One move per day, so that being tired is no disadvantage (engine can ponder all day). * Human has access to endgame tablebases and opening databases, like the engine. * Human can make notes and has a software like Chess Position Trainer, which can min max, like the engine. If the human is a GM with Elo 2700+ I predict 25 draws and 5 wins for the human. The engine wins 70 games.
    - Bootvis 8mo ago
      From the Stockfish docs at https://official-stockfish.github.io/docs/stockfish-wiki/Stockfish-FAQ.html#the-elo-rating-of-stockfish https://official-stockfish.github.io/docs/stockfish-wiki/Sto.... > Rating Stockfish against a human scale, such as FIDE Elo, has become virtually impossible. The gap in strength is so large that a human player cannot secure the necessary draws or wins for an accurate Elo measurement. [1]: https://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/ https://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/
    - copper4eva 8mo ago
      You're way off the mark here on modern engine strength. There are many examples of top players playing Leela Knight Odds. And none of them even got remotely close to a decent record. Usually a few draws, and maybe a win. But almost entirely losses. And that is with knight odds. Without that, zero chance.
- dyauspitr 8mo ago
  It technically could happen but hasn’t so far.

nilslindemann 8mo ago

This is most definitely wrong. There will be some draws and even a few wins, though that's very rare indeed.

School-Cotton 8mo ago
When is the last time a human has beaten a computer in a fair chess game?
- nilslindemann 8mo ago
  A fair match has never been played between humans and computers. Let's say we have a fair match: * 100 games, to have some statistical relevance. * One move per day, so that being tired is no disadvantage (engine can ponder all day). * Human has access to endgame tablebases and opening databases, like the engine. * Human can make notes and has a software like Chess Position Trainer, which can min max, like the engine. If the human is a GM with Elo 2700+ I predict 25 draws and 5 wins for the human. The engine wins 70 games.
  - Bootvis 8mo ago
    From the Stockfish docs at https://official-stockfish.github.io/docs/stockfish-wiki/Stockfish-FAQ.html#the-elo-rating-of-stockfish https://official-stockfish.github.io/docs/stockfish-wiki/Sto.... > Rating Stockfish against a human scale, such as FIDE Elo, has become virtually impossible. The gap in strength is so large that a human player cannot secure the necessary draws or wins for an accurate Elo measurement. [1]: https://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/ https://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/
  - copper4eva 8mo ago
    You're way off the mark here on modern engine strength. There are many examples of top players playing Leela Knight Odds. And none of them even got remotely close to a decent record. Usually a few draws, and maybe a win. But almost entirely losses. And that is with knight odds. Without that, zero chance.
dyauspitr 8mo ago
It technically could happen but hasn’t so far.