Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 21 Mar '09 07:42
    Will there ever be a human who will never lose even one game of chess? Will there ever be a computer engine that will never lose a chess game to another human or another engine?
  2. 21 Mar '09 07:54
    Originally posted by oleglelchuk
    Will there ever be a human who will never lose even one game of chess? Will there ever be a computer engine that will never lose a chess game to another human or another engine?
    Will there ever be a human who will never lose even one game of chess?

    Yes, of course. For instance, all those humans who will never play even one game of chess.
  3. 21 Mar '09 09:42
    Originally posted by LemonJello
    [b]Will there ever be a human who will never lose even one game of chess?

    Yes, of course. For instance, all those humans who will never play even one game of chess.[/b]
    I haven't won even one game of chess against my girlfriend. Not even one! She says that I will never win any game in the future either. Isn't she great in chess?
  4. 21 Mar '09 10:19
    Any statement about the members of the empty set is true.

    Kasparov lost every game I played against him.
  5. 21 Mar '09 10:21
    Originally posted by ResigningSoon
    Any statement about the members of the empty set is true.

    Kasparov lost every game I played against him.
    And you lost every game you played against me. Therefore I am irrefutably better than Kasparov!

  6. 21 Mar '09 14:07
    Grandmasters don't get where they are at without serious losses. Its how you learn the game. People dont come up with crazy sacrafices on their own, many of them have had that same tactic used on themselves!! Also at the highest levels they have to take risks to win or else it will be a draw always. Taking risks may reside in a loss, but the best of the best can get away with those risks and kasparov was one of the best.
  7. Standard member wormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    21 Mar '09 14:34 / 1 edit
    "to become good you need to lose 10000 games first"

    I think that's paraphrased from sun tzu's art of war? or maybe not. but someone said it anyway, and was right.
  8. Standard member RECUVIC
    international loser
    21 Mar '09 14:43
    All really good chess players are at the end of the day willing to take risks in order to win,the laws of probability therefore ensure that some lost games are one result,however it is not losing that actually matters at high and highest levels of play but knowing why the loss occured in the first place. Hardly would a game of chess by worth playing if you knew in advance that you could not possibly lose!
  9. 21 Mar '09 16:53 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by wormwood
    "to become good you need to lose 10000 games first"

    I think that's paraphrased from sun tzu's art of war? or maybe not. but someone said it anyway, and was right.
    "to become good you need to lose 10000 games first"

    So how do you ever get good at fighting to death?
  10. 21 Mar '09 20:03
    Originally posted by oleglelchuk
    Will there ever be a human who will never lose even one game of chess? Will there ever be a computer engine that will never lose a chess game to another human or another engine?
    I imagine at some point in the future, chess engines will be so good that no human will be able to beat them even once. But I don't think it matters much - At least in my mind, the real battles will always be human vs. human.
  11. 24 Mar '09 19:22
    Originally posted by oleglelchuk
    Will there ever be a human who will never lose even one game of chess? Will there ever be a computer engine that will never lose a chess game to another human or another engine?
    Actually I was thinking, will there ever be a boy born who can swim faster than a shark?
  12. 24 Mar '09 19:53
    Originally posted by wormwood
    "to become good you need to lose 10000 games first"

    I think that's paraphrased from sun tzu's art of war? or maybe not. but someone said it anyway, and was right.
    I think Karpov said that...