Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 143 posts

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#61

Post by GraffitiTim »

pjungwir wrote: post #51
throwaway_yy2Di wrote: post #20

1. e4 Nc6 2. Nf3 d5 3. Bd3 Nf6 4. exd5 Qxd5 5. Nc3 Qh5 6. 0-0 Bg4 7. h3 Ne5 ╔═══════════════╗ ║♜ … … … ♚ ♝ … ♜║ ║♟ ♟ ♟ … ♟ ♟ ♟ ♟║ ║… … … … … ♞ … …║ ║… … … … ♞ … … ♛║ ║… … … … … … ♝ …║ ║… … ♘ ♗ … ♘ … ♙║ ║♙ ♙ ♙ ♙ … ♙ ♙ …║ ║♖ … ♗ ♕ … ♖ ♔ …║ ╚═══════════════╝ 8. hxg4 Nfxg4 9. Nxe5 Qh2# ╔═══════════════╗ ║♜ … … … ♚ ♝ … ♜║ ║♟ ♟ ♟ … ♟ ♟ ♟ ♟║ ║… … … … … … … …║ ║… … … … ♘ … … …║ ║… … … … … … ♞ …║ ║… … ♘ ♗ … … … …║ ║♙ ♙ ♙ ♙ ……

I'm no expert, but since all the other comments are just complaining, here are my (very amateur) thoughts: 1. e4 The most common opening in chess. Bill knows he's supposed to bring out some knights and bishops in these next few moves, which is good! 1. ... Nc6 2. Nf3 d5 Both black moves aim for an open center so he can make it a fast game with plenty options to attack. His move invites Bill to waste a turn changing t…

That analysis looks fine except for the end.

At the end, Bill's 9. Nxe5 resulted in an immediate checkmate. Instead, 9. Re1 (Rook one square to the left) stops the mate since it gives white's king an escape route. In an even match, the game would be winning for white at that point because Magnus sacrificed a bishop for his now-failed attack.

Magnus screwed up big-time or was goofing around. He would still be able to beat Gates from that losing position, but I'm very surprised he let that happen.

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#62

Post by prateekj »

oldstrangers wrote: post #53
georgemcbay wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah he has time to think when the opponent is moving, but 30 seconds just isn't a lot of time if you consider there is a minimum practical time per move just based on the physical reality of being a human that has to move the piece and hit the clock, as illustrated pretty well by Carlsen's move where he knocked over a piece and burnt something like 3 seconds on one move. I think any decently skilled (but non-world-c…

"Justin Beiber of chess". 'The Mozart of chess' is the general consensus. The 'Justin Beiber of chess' is rather insulting.

I couldn't agree more! Why would anyone come up with "Justin Bieber of Chess"?

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#64

Post by prateekj »

samolang wrote: post #2

If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.

Nobody is judging anybody! For god's sake, one is a world chess champion and the other is a tech mogul who ruled the software industry for nearly two decades. It's just fun to watch them sit together and play a game of chess.

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#65

Post by oldstrangers »

markhelo wrote: post #57
oldstrangers wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carlsen had a 30 second clock. Even an average player should've been able to put Carlsen into time pressure at that point, assuming you didn't fall into any silly traps like Gates did.

Disagree. In 30 seconds Carlsen has a much higher recall of the vast number of boards he has played than an average person. This is a mismatch even if Bill Gates is really smart. So in 30 seconds whatever plans an average chess player can conjure up, Carlsen has already seen them 10 moves ahead.

From my other comment: If I was Bill I would've played a very passive game, shutting down the middle of the board as quickly as possible. Create as complex a middle game as possible, and let Carslen go all in on sacrifices or whatever he'd need to do to break the board open. Deny as many exchanges as possible, win on time.

Carlsen quickly realized Bill was a push over and started parking all his pieces on white's kingside as quickly as possible. Bill basically played as poorly as could be expected. To get mated in 9 moves means you've basically forced yourself to lose.

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#66

Post by georgemcbay »

prateekj wrote: post #62
oldstrangers wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Justin Beiber of chess". 'The Mozart of chess' is the general consensus. The 'Justin Beiber of chess' is rather insulting.

I couldn't agree more! Why would anyone come up with "Justin Bieber of Chess"?

Freelance journalists aren't paid by the word anymore, they are paid by the Bieber. No sense writing an article without the word Bieber in it, that's not worth a dime.

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#67

Post by eitland »

GraffitiTim wrote: post #61
pjungwir wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no expert, but since all the other comments are just complaining, here are my (very amateur) thoughts: 1. e4 The most common opening in chess. Bill knows he's supposed to bring out some knights and bishops in these next few moves, which is good! 1. ... Nc6 2. Nf3 d5 Both black moves aim for an open center so he can make it a fast game with plenty options to attack. His move invites Bill to waste a turn changing t…

That analysis looks fine except for the end. At the end, Bill's 9. Nxe5 resulted in an immediate checkmate. Instead, 9. Re1 (Rook one square to the left) stops the mate since it gives white's king an escape route. In an even match, the game would be winning for white at that point because Magnus sacrificed a bishop for his now-failed attack. Magnus screwed up big-time or was goofing around. He would still be able to…

I just watched the show on local tv and Magnus commented afterwards that he did something against his principles and gambled that he could trick Bill into it.

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#68

Post by willvarfar »

I watched the Skavlan show tonight, and found the whole thing very fun. The true story of Irish adoptions was particularly harrowing, but the chess match lightened the load.

It didn't seem that Bill knew he was going to be asked to play chess, and he seemed to take it in good humour.

Bill prefaced the game with apologies that nobody should expect much and that he was a much better Go player.

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#69

Post by willvarfar »

jsyedidia wrote: post #47

Actually, Carlsen was playing for tricks (as might be reasonable when you have just 30 seconds). Bill Gates had a winning position on the 9th move. If instead of 9. Nxe5?? which allows an immediate checkmate, he had played 9. Re1!, he would have had a huge advantage. I'm an international master, and more importantly, my computer backs up my opinion. I'm surprised Carlsen played a game with just 30 seconds on his cloc…

Carlsen actually said he was just playing that for tricks, and started trying to explain this in the Skarvlan show itself, but camera pans quickly away.

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#70

Post by scotty79 »

As a kid I played a lot of chess with one of my childhood friends. I was always (almost?) winning.

Imagine my surprise when in high-school I played with a guy who learned to play chess as a kid. He beat me just as fast as Bill Gates got beaten. Then he beat me, but slower in subsequent 7 games that day and then some over the following months. But one day I finally beat him. I guess he got a little careless after all that wins and I learned good bit from him.

Interestingly I beat his ass in checkers every time. Also interestingly roughly about the same time I played chess with an actual math genius (distance between two lines of his reasoning required whole page of careful explanation for me) and he was making dumbest moves I've seen because he barely ever played chess before.

Games are not about thinking. By thinking long and hard you can get to 5-10% of skill of a master. The rest is learning from books and stronger opponents.

I had another friend. He had played significantly more unreal tournament than quake, I just the opposite. I was kicking his ass 50 to 1 in quake even on a slower computer with smaller monitor and crappier mouse, but he was kicking my ass 50 to 1 in Unreal Tournament and I wasn't bad at that game. I was as good as any of my friends except for this guy.

I guess my point is that skill is very specific to the game and must be earned.

Post reply on HN