Will competitive chess die?

@tpr #6
No. While cheating is rampant in modern chess, human competetive spirit is an even more powereul motivator. So I think competetive chess will transform into something different. However, I do suspect that it will involve consensual use of computers.. a type of "centaur" chess.

It reminds me of mathematics in the class room. I am old enough to remember math classes when calculators where considered cheating. Within a single generation, they were required tools.

I'm not sure what it will look like, but correspondence chess has revealed that the use of computers is itself a skill, so simply having access to a computer does not "even the playing field". I see chess continuing in a manner that will still allow certain humans to reign as champions over time - even if it involves the use of computer assistance.

I have always wondered what a world chess tournament would look like if all rules about "cheating" were suspended and players were freely allowed to play their best possible game using all available resources. I think we would see certain grandmasters consistently rise to the top.. not merely the drawish determinism of computers.

That's an interesting point of view, I think that it would deshumanize chess more than it is already, and that there would be the problematic of "who does have access to the best program?" question. The pleasure of thinking and calculating would drastically decrease too

#11
Please take a look at how many draws correspondence now produces
www.iccf.com/event?id=66745

Classical chess is already dead: World Championship 12 games = 12 draws, then on to rapid.

@tpr #13
Yes I agree.. very drawish.. like modern chess. But not determanistic. It will still have the spark of human choice and influence. That's why certain humans tend to excel at it. So it would still be competetive.

#13
One game ( Game 6 was mate in 30 )
Fabiano could have won

Not sure it will impact my local club or my local county scene within my lifetime. Think I have about 25 years of play left in me at best and the amount of beer we seem to consume will surely counteract the advances of science.
That said, I have zero ambitions or talent with Chess so it is not that important to me with regard to the Pro scene.

I guess from a young and talented perspective the question might more accurately be that given the new tech and theory expansion etc, can he/she make a living?, for that I would say it is possibly easier than it ever has been given the online opportunities but it is still very hard.
ie you could probably apply half the effort doing something else and make twice as much, however if you love Chess and can think of nothing you would rather spend your life devoted to and doing. You will find a way.

Arnies 6 rules of success are worth following.

#15 Carlsen also had enough advantage to win in the 1st game at some point, and an advantage in the 12th game as well.

Why do you need implants to cheat OTB ? - leaving aside the constant stream of people getting caught cheating with smartphones in the toilet - there are plenty of micro-devices that are tiny and very hard to spot which can signal you to moves.

These can probably be bought online or at "spy shops".

You would need a thorough strip search to find these. So anybody who REALLY wants to cheat and get away with it OTB can do this.

Of course, their performance can be analyzed after the game and found to be similar to engine use - however this can be made more difficult by a cheater who only cheats on some moves.

#15
That is right, but he did not find it.
#17
That is right too, but he could not win the first game and he chose not to pursue a win in the 12th game and rather go to the rapid tiebreakers.