Answers.Body: <p>I call it silly.  I do not want a computer I beat helping me.  It gives the human no advantage at all. I would want the computer I cannot beat helping me against yet another computer. </p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-04-30T12:21:17.383Z
Answers.Text: You beat a engine once is not equal to the engine being completely unhelpful as an advisers. After all the top players have relatively " weaker" seconds.
Answers.UserDisplayName: AKP2002
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-01-23T17:08:19.677Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-01-23T17:08:19.677Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: edwina oliver
Body: <p>I have just came up with a new chess variant. 
  The variant works like this. 
  So, the player starts with a match with a computer (not-so-powerful one)
  If the player wins the match, he gets to use the computer as his advisor.
  And then, the player, with the new advisor goes up the ladder and challenge a more powerful computer. And so on and so forth.</p>
  
  <p>What do you guys think about this variant? Will this give the human player an advantage? Do you think that the World Chess Champion can win the Best Chess Program (Stockfish) using this system? </p>
  
  <p>I have got this idea from a chess match of GM Daniel Naroditsky+Rybka vs Stockfish match. IMHO, the computer has already won the human-computer chess rivalry. But if human players can subdue weaker chess computer and then use them against stronger computer, it would be another way of saying that human can still beat computer. </p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-01-23T12:42:51.473Z
Comments.Text: Why have the human at all in this setup..
Comments.UserDisplayName: SAS
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2024-11-03T13:34:37.343Z
Comments.Text: Computer as an advisor idea was popular at a time, and this was thought to be stronger than computer alone or human alone. This was before that ML/AI revolution hit the game.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Cyriac Antony
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-08-10T09:56:10.750Z
Comments.Text: Can this really be called a chess variant? It seems to be just a training scheme for regular chess.
Comments.UserDisplayName: David Richerby
Tags: <engines><chess-variants>
Title: New chess variant (opinion required)
ThreadText: # New chess variant (opinion required)
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2014-08-09)
  
  I have just came up with a new chess variant.
  The variant works like this.
  So, the player starts with a match with a computer (not-so-powerful one)
  If the player wins the match, he gets to use the computer as his advisor.
  And then, the player, with the new advisor goes up the ladder and challenge a more powerful computer. And so on and so forth.
  
  What do you guys think about this variant? Will this give the human player an advantage? Do you think that the World Chess Champion can win the Best Chess Program (Stockfish) using this system?
  
  I have got this idea from a chess match of GM Daniel Naroditsky+Rybka vs Stockfish match. IMHO, the computer has already won the human-computer chess rivalry. But if human players can subdue weaker chess computer and then use them against stronger computer, it would be another way of saying that human can still beat computer.
  
  **Tags:** engines, chess-variants
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_3**: Can this really be called a chess variant? It seems to be just a training scheme for regular chess.  
  > **username_1**: Why have the human at all in this setup..  
  > **username_2**: Computer as an advisor idea was popular at a time, and this was thought to be stronger than computer alone or human alone. This was before that ML/AI revolution hit the game.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2020-01-23. Score: -2
  
  I call it silly. I do not want a computer I beat helping me. It gives the human no advantage at all. I would want the computer I cannot beat helping me against yet another computer.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_5**: You beat a engine once is not equal to the engine being completely unhelpful as an advisers. After all the top players have relatively " weaker" seconds.  
  
  ---
  
  