01 Sep '13 10:31>
Hello.
I know that in blitz computers can completely obliterate any super-GM. Even in classical chess, computers are superior, though super-GM can sometime draw them. But what about in correspondence chess?
Let's say we make a match between Magnus Carlsen and Houdini 3 Pro, consisting of 10 games, with a time control of one week per move (and we will suppose that Carlsen stays focused at 100% during the entire match and meditates about the ongoing game at least 14 hours a day).
Houdini gets an opening database and the Nalimov endgame tablebases. While Carlsen isn't allowed to use anything but his brain (he probably wouldn't need any opening database anyway).
Who would win?
I know that in blitz computers can completely obliterate any super-GM. Even in classical chess, computers are superior, though super-GM can sometime draw them. But what about in correspondence chess?
Let's say we make a match between Magnus Carlsen and Houdini 3 Pro, consisting of 10 games, with a time control of one week per move (and we will suppose that Carlsen stays focused at 100% during the entire match and meditates about the ongoing game at least 14 hours a day).
Houdini gets an opening database and the Nalimov endgame tablebases. While Carlsen isn't allowed to use anything but his brain (he probably wouldn't need any opening database anyway).
Who would win?