Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves • Hacker News Board

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#111

Post by pslam » Sat, Jan 25, 2014, 1:45 AM UTC

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #93

There is a Derren Brown (UK Illusionist) piece where he plays seven opponents at once, walking round in a big circle, and amazingly wins 4 out of 7. Afterwards the explanation is simple - he played 6 masters or grandmasters, and one guy off the street. And simply (!) memorised the moves of player A and made them against player C, B to D etc. All he had to do was play a decent game against the guy off the street and h…

That's quite a security hack. The Grandmasters are being made to play each other via him - they are kind of oracles.

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#112

Post by dudus » Sat, Jan 25, 2014, 1:46 AM UTC

packetslave wrote: post #63

Carlsen visited Google last week and played 10 simultaneous games against Googlers. Chessbase did a writeup here: http://en.chessbase.com/post/carlsen-google TL;DR: Carlsen went 10-0 with only one close game, against the highest rated player (2168)

Not a very avid chess player but I had a lot of fun going over your game notes. Thanks and congrats for the achievements in that game.

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#113

Post by jrs99 » Sat, Jan 25, 2014, 1:49 AM UTC

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…

you're surprised that Carlsen played a "fake" for fun game with 30 seconds on the clock because he could easily LOSE? And because his reputation would take a total DIVE? And also because he's not the NUMBER ONE bullet player?

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#114

Post by jrs99 » Sat, Jan 25, 2014, 1:58 AM UTC

oldstrangers wrote: post #36

elorant wrote: post #22

The amazing part for someone like me who knows just basic chess is how aggressive Carlsen was. It’s scary seeing him coming on you with all those pieces and instantaneous moves. It also gives you a measure of his grandeur. It seems BillG got panicked given the little time he had to think his moves; at least I’d do.

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.

Gates is a below average player. If you're 50 years old and haven't picked up a bat since little league, you're a below average baseball player.

he's a below average chess player playing with 2 minutes on the clock. 30 seconds is comfortable for carlsen, whereas Gates probably doesn't play at 2 minutes regularly. 2 minutes is insanely small amount of time for people that don't play.

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#115

Post by has2k1 » Sat, Jan 25, 2014, 2:01 AM UTC

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #93

There is a Derren Brown (UK Illusionist) piece where he plays seven opponents at once, walking round in a big circle, and amazingly wins 4 out of 7. Afterwards the explanation is simple - he played 6 masters or grandmasters, and one guy off the street. And simply (!) memorised the moves of player A and made them against player C, B to D etc. All he had to do was play a decent game against the guy off the street and h…

He was probably inspired by a sub-plot in Sydney Sheldon's "If Tomorrow Comes" (1985).

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#116

Post by jrs99 » Sat, Jan 25, 2014, 2:01 AM UTC

mmanfrin wrote: post #92

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…

Is not knowing your opponent part of the strategy? Carlsen played the 'tricks' way he did because he knew, or felt reasonably certain that Gates would fall for them. Critiquing his play based on what you would do in Gates' position is simply wrong, because I'm assuming the #1 chess player in the world would play differently had he been playing against an international master such as yourself.

I don't think Carlsen was at all certain Gates would fall for those tricks. I just don't think Carlsen would care if he lost. People are assuming a lot of things. They're assuming that Carlsen wants to win at all costs. The same with Gates. Carlsen did what he wanted because the outcome didn't really matter to him.

Kind of like Gates beating Shaq in a basketball game and then analyzing the strategy of each player to try to understand how that happened.

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#117

Post by bobwatson » Sat, Jan 25, 2014, 2:05 AM UTC

GraffitiTim wrote: post #88

usaphp wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain what does "playing for tricks" mean in chess?

It means making knowingly inferior moves in order to set a trap that you are hoping your opponent will fall for (which Gates did). Normally not something serious chess players do, but I guess this is a weird situation.

Depending on regional dialect - it can also mean playing to capture pieces (i.e. like 'taking tricks' in card games) rather than with an overall strategy.

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#118

Post by mikehearn » Sat, Jan 25, 2014, 2:21 AM UTC

tedsanders wrote: post #105

mikehearn wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the time when people achieve world-class ability in something, they end up exclusively competing against others that have a similar talent level. It's worthwhile (and fun) to be occasionally reminded just how much of a talent gap there is between them and the average person.

I see. I guess what's obvious to me - that a grandmaster can crush a chump in 30 seconds - is not obvious to all. I'm glad that so many people find it interesting.

I think that's true, particularly if you are well-versed in chess. The outcome that Carlsen would win is obvious to everyone, but the details – the actual minutia of the game – are not.

For example (and I'm not a chess player), if you told me that Carlsen and Gates played and asked me to guess how many moves it would take for Carlsen to win, I would've put it in the 15-20 range. Nine was a genuine surprise. Even more enlightening, though obvious in retrospect, was how quickly and seemingly without thought Carlsen was able to play each move, almost as if he knew what move Gates would make before he made it. It makes perfect sense, but it was fascinating to watch and it made me appreciate how much of a second-nature chess truly is to Carlsen.

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#119

Post by jvagner » Sat, Jan 25, 2014, 2:48 AM UTC

solutionyogi wrote: post #110

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…

That video you linked is insane. I couldn't even see what moves they are making. It reminded me of chess between Joey and Phoebe. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7n_zq_M9OGk Thank you for sharing.

in the speed chess video above, why did both players advance all their pieces off the back rows for the midpoint of the game?

Re: Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves

#120

Post by raintrees » Sat, Jan 25, 2014, 3:49 AM UTC

pzxc wrote: post #107

raintrees wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My dad once challenged me (again) and I really didn't want to play, so I ran Fool's Mate on him (I had read it in some book of chess challenges). He never asked again, it was kind of ruined for him... Gotta watch those teenagers, I wasn't nice sometimes when my free reading was being interrupted. Edit: glad I grew up some...

Not to nitpick, but I'm sure you mean Scholar's Mate, where you attack the pawn in front of the king's bishop with two pieces (usually queen and bishop/knight) and win in 4 moves or so. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholar%27s_mate Many people erroneously call this fool's mate, but fool's mate is actually the shortest chess game possible (win in 2 moves), which is virtually impossible (you'd have to be playing agains…

Thank you, yes, he moved a piece or two outside of the pattern, but everything else worked a treat: Queen and Bishop trapped his King, I think maybe 7 moves or so, including the stumbles.