Hacker News Reader

Beating Crafty is enough to prove that it can beat any human.. that is quite an achievement, or atleast a notable result. Of course, its easy to criticize without having played chess or doing any research. Going by Crafty's ELO, it would win against Magnus Carlsen 80% of the time

View on HN

> Going by Crafty's ELO, it would win against Magnus Carlsen 80% of the time

Careful with that logic, I'm not sure that engine ELOs are in the same rating pool as human players (and so rating comparisons between the two are sort of meaningless).

Why would it ever lose to Carlsen?

When was the last game an ELO > 3000 AI lost to a human at all?

"Elo's central assumption was that the chess performance of each player in each game is a normally distributed random variable."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system

carlsen (like all super grandmasters) would happily concede that he can't beat 3000+ engines most of the time. i don't know if chess commentators appreciate what this means about chess engines and the fundamental principles of chess (i know i don't / can't), but it's universally agreed that these "3000 ELO" chess engines are demonstrably stronger than every known human chess player.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com