Losing is a learning experience, after all.
Since "the blunder of the century" (occurring in a particular game which really had no effect on the outcome of the match), I haven't really seen any new challenges from big players for engines. Why not? They all use them to train, so why not host a match with analysis to show us what really is required to train at the highest level today? And don't say it's money ...
It's just that when it comes to chess in the 21st century, man vs. machine is clearly the more interesting contest, and the contest that is most likely in general to benefit the average observer. Man vs. man is just a question of who blundered first at this stage. So, it's an ego thing, then?
USCF is particularly bad and unrealistic about the issue of computers in chess. Often they act as if computers and engines provide only novel input necessary to spur along their otherwise boring analysis ... a joke is made and the fact that most any walmart computer running any one of several engines could destroy them, or any human, in just about any setting, all day long. So, it's an ego thing, then?
See I just don't understand. If we had a robot that could destroy any human at basketball, I really wouldn't watch human basketball anymore. I'd be more interested in how the robot came to be. So I don't really understand chess culture these days.
I like to watch engines play. Especially each other. It seems like a forgotten topic almost. But I agree it is all about ego.
The reason is really simple, an engine does not use chess ideas that have been developed by humans to reach a high level of play. Engines use excessive computations, and therefore the beauty is lost.
Generally beauty comes when you have the insight of a combination of nice ideas.
Imagine that you have to solve a problem, and there are two solutions one uses a cute one line argument, and the is we compute 100 cases and we that the statement holds. The first is something I would be interested to see the second, my reaction of the second would be okay I believe you.
Players use engines to make sure their ideas are solid and do not have tactical shortcomings.
I think there is no longer match human vs engine because now, with the powerfull of the computers, the engine will always win.
"I like to watch engines play. Especially each other. It seems like a forgotten topic almost. But I agree it is all about ego. "
I used to play and watch engine vs engine games when I was younger (particulary on playchess and later some engine testing matches).
Its kinda helpful for memorizing patterns.
Like throw in a couple engines at 1 or 5 minutes with a good opening book.
"I think there is no longer match human vs engine because now, with the powerfull of the computers, the engine will always win."
In general you would either see lots of draws or wins in favor of the engine. But there are some posititions where certain engines have problems to solve.
My opinions so I may be wrong.
