Answers.Body: <p>Masters use computers as training tools.  They allow a master to quickly check the viability of variations and understand why some moves are good or bad.  Further, they afford searchable instant access to millions of positions and countless openings to the master.</p>
  
  <p>In short, the computer is your sparring partner, second, and librarian, and who works for cheap.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2013-02-16T01:59:05.433Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2013-02-16T02:25:19.840Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2013-02-16T02:25:19.840Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Tony Ennis
Answers.Body: <p>All current chess players use computers to improve their game. This includes evaluating new positions in the opening resulting in better and deeper opening preparation. They also can set up a board and let the computer evaluate for hours to discover new lines that were previously too complicated to discover. </p>
  
  <p>Also all chess players maintain huge databases of games, this they can search for games played by a specific player (particularly useful in matchplay) or search through historical games that contained a given position. Thus the use of computers is a vital tool to improve ones game especially when dealing with the "opening preparation".</p>
  
  <p>An example of how new chess players are coming up - Hikaru Nakamura claims to have never read a single chess book and learnt completely off the computer.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-09-27T01:53:58.173Z
Answers.Text: source for naka no books?
Answers.UserDisplayName: BCLC
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2013-02-18T16:44:48.170Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2013-02-18T16:44:48.170Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: NoviceProgrammer
Answers.Body: <p>Today, chess is dominated by computers, that's true because for the same calculating scale (ELO rating), we can compare ELO points of computers and ELO points of humans.</p>
  
  <p>Today, the best ELO rating for a player (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_Carlsen" rel="nofollow">Magnus Carlsen</a>): <strong>2872</strong> (february 2013).<br>
  Today, the best ELO rating for a computer (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houdini_%28chess%29" rel="nofollow">Houdini 3 64-bit 4CPU</a>): <strong>3320</strong>.</p>
  
  <p>Moreover, best chess players use chess engines to analyze positions. For instance, Viswanathan Anand currently use Houdini for training.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2017-02-05T02:31:55.373Z
Answers.Text: No, you cannot compare absolute values of these numbers! The Elo rating is made in such a way that it measures *relative strength* between players in a pool. So Magnus Carlsen's rating tells something about how strong he is among FIDE chess players. You can compare his number with Nakamura's number or anybody else who has a (FIDE) Elo. The computer rating results from games between computers only, so it tells something about how strong Houdini is relative to other computers only. You cannot compare this computer Elo with Fide Elo or any rating you might have on internet chess sites.
Answers.UserDisplayName: user1583209
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2013-02-18T15:29:30.107Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2013-02-18T16:17:57.430Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2013-02-18T16:17:57.430Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Zistoloen
Answers.Body: <p>Computers allow unusual endgames to be solved much more quickly than a human can, if the human can do it at all. In <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasparov_versus_the_World#Moves_51.E2.80.9362" rel="nofollow">Kasparov vs the World</a>, the game ended with a 25-move forced checkmate discovered by computer.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-03-04T20:23:36.000Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2014-03-04T20:23:36.000Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Sparr
Answers.Body: <p>Kasparov has said that computer + Grandmaster analysis is vastly superior than either computer or Grandmaster alone.  I believe there was a chess league for a while that allowed strong programmer + player to compete one another along with strong chess computers or players alone.  The combined players usually won tournaments.   That's because the strong players can sense when a computer move is perhaps not the best long term strategic plan, although in the short term it is tactically justified.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2017-02-04T22:05:50.927Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2017-02-04T22:05:50.927Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: ToddM
Body: <p>Every time I read articles on chess I see people who say that chess  is now dominated by computers. For example if you look for a thread on the subject 'Fischer vs Carlsen' (just an example) you see people comment that if Fischer had access to computers he would have been better. Why? What do modern GM's do with computers?</p>
  
Tags: <engines>
Title: Why do people say today's chess is dominated by computers?
ThreadText: # Why do people say today's chess is dominated by computers?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2013-02-15)
  
  Every time I read articles on chess I see people who say that chess is now dominated by computers. For example if you look for a thread on the subject 'Fischer vs Carlsen' (just an example) you see people comment that if Fischer had access to computers he would have been better. Why? What do modern GM's do with computers?
  
  **Tags:** engines
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 5 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2013-02-16. Score: 11
  
  Masters use computers as training tools. They allow a master to quickly check the viability of variations and understand why some moves are good or bad. Further, they afford searchable instant access to millions of positions and countless openings to the master.
  
  In short, the computer is your sparring partner, second, and librarian, and who works for cheap.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2013-02-18. Score: 7
  
  All current chess players use computers to improve their game. This includes evaluating new positions in the opening resulting in better and deeper opening preparation. They also can set up a board and let the computer evaluate for hours to discover new lines that were previously too complicated to discover.
  
  Also all chess players maintain huge databases of games, this they can search for games played by a specific player (particularly useful in matchplay) or search through historical games that contained a given position. Thus the use of computers is a vital tool to improve ones game especially when dealing with the "opening preparation".
  
  An example of how new chess players are coming up - Hikaru Nakamura claims to have never read a single chess book and learnt completely off the computer.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_3**: source for naka no books?  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2013-02-18. Score: 3
  
  Today, chess is dominated by computers, that's true because for the same calculating scale (ELO rating), we can compare ELO points of computers and ELO points of humans.
  
  Today, the best ELO rating for a player ([Magnus Carlsen](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_Carlsen)): **2872** (february 2013).  
  Today, the best ELO rating for a computer ([Houdini 3 64-bit 4CPU](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houdini_%28chess%29)): **3320**.
  
  Moreover, best chess players use chess engines to analyze positions. For instance, Viswanathan Anand currently use Houdini for training.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_5**: No, you cannot compare absolute values of these numbers! The Elo rating is made in such a way that it measures *relative strength* between players in a pool. So Magnus Carlsen's rating tells something about how strong he is among FIDE chess players. You can compare his number with Nakamura's number or anybody else who has a (FIDE) Elo. The computer rating results from games between computers only, so it tells something about how strong Houdini is relative to other computers only. You cannot compare this computer Elo with Fide Elo or any rating you might have on internet chess sites.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_6 on 2014-03-04. Score: 0
  
  Computers allow unusual endgames to be solved much more quickly than a human can, if the human can do it at all. In [Kasparov vs the World](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasparov_versus_the_World#Moves_51.E2.80.9362), the game ended with a 25-move forced checkmate discovered by computer.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_7 on 2017-02-04. Score: 0
  
  Kasparov has said that computer + Grandmaster analysis is vastly superior than either computer or Grandmaster alone. I believe there was a chess league for a while that allowed strong programmer + player to compete one another along with strong chess computers or players alone. The combined players usually won tournaments. That's because the strong players can sense when a computer move is perhaps not the best long term strategic plan, although in the short term it is tactically justified.
  
  
  ---
  
  