Kramnik and AlphaZero: How to Rethink Chess‎
Meh.  I dont believe we have even come close to finding the best chess strategy for humans and strongly disgagree with the premise of this article that chess strategy for humans is at some kind of ending and we need to change the rules or else it will never get better.<p>In fact, I have done a lot of research into chess engine theory and believe  flaws in the stockfish algorithm directly contrubute to the &quot;boring&quot; chess we see today, since all pros use engines to train now.  The old engines cant see lines that alphazero sees which involve long term positional sacrifices, and use a linear evaluation function which in principle can never capture the strong non linearities inherenit in chess. (alphazero uses a non linear evaluation function, which is its nueral net)<p>Considered as a mathematical space, the universe of possible chess strategies is an extremely large order of infinity.  There are also many aspects of time management in relation to the computational complexity of the position which modern engines dont model at all.<p>I believe that modern engines are overly materialistic and that aggresive positional sacrficies in the style of Tal and alphazero are the future of chess strategy for humans