Hacker News Reader

Ohh thanks. Read that exactly backwards.

Even if its king would be mate in one, it does not matter, as you lost on time. As the engine varies, this variation will probably not be repeated. Kasparov can prepare for lines, as he usual does, but there is no guarantee that the engine plays these lines.

BTW, I also played a few games, 2400+ player on Lichess, I had no chance. My impression is that the claim by this author is correct. Or I am overrated :-)

So... it wasn't "trivial" for you to find a line to beat it. It was, in fact, so hard that you lost because it took you too long. (I am also sure that correspondence chess players could find a line to beat Kasparov, but it doesn't make them better players nor the correct line to beat him 'trivial'.)

I think this is a gap in what trivial means here. Some people deploy significant compute to attempt to find exotic lines. I believe most in the chess community would concur that if a human, apparently more or less unassisted, found a line to beat it in their first day of attempts, then finding a line is trivial.

It also is not clear to me they didn’t just stop playing once they had +5, letting the clock expire, seeing as the opponent has no feelings or expectation of fair play. The game is detectably over at that point.