|
|
|
|
|
by dingledog
3313 days ago
|
|
I, too, remember this. I'm very close to the chess engine scene, and while people (such as replies to this thread) have tried to argue that engine development has not taken away from chess, I'm afraid their misguided. Anybody paying attention to top level chess knows that it has turned into mind bogglingly boring forced draw lines due to engine analysis. I've seen super GMs argue that analysis is so deep now that "e4" openings for white may be unplayable due to how rapidly black can equalize. Romantic play has been all but squeezed out of chess, which is why there has been renewed demand for blitz chess and murmurs that it may one day supplant standard chess as the main World Championship. The replies miss out that improvements in, say, automobile speed don't impact how marathon runners run their races. But improvements in AI due modify how cognitive (rather than physical) games are played. There is a trade off that is unavoidable. I imagine Go will now become over analyzed just like chess where the top players memorize spreadsheets full of opening moves. Fortunately, there are variants of chess like Zhouse, which still appear too complex for engine to dominate any position (although they will defeat any human), and for which nearly every move is romantic still. |
|
I also doubt that pros will try to memorize openings like chess players would; they're very different games and this sort of opening memorization is way more important and efficient in chess than in go.