
Bill Gates loses to Magnus Carlsen in 9 moves - prateekj
http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/bill-gates-loses-9-moves-chess-champion-2D11988269
======
jsyedidia
Actually, Carlsen was playing for tricks (as might be reasonable when you have
just 30 seconds). Bill Gates had a winning position on the 9th move. If
instead of 9. Nxe5?? which allows an immediate checkmate, he had played 9.
Re1!, he would have had a huge advantage. I'm an international master, and
more importantly, my computer backs up my opinion.

I'm surprised Carlsen played a game with just 30 seconds on his clock; it's
easy to lose in that situation since you simply don't have enough time to make
more than about 30 moves. And by the way, the best player in the world at
ridiculously short time controls ("bullet chess") like 1 minute for the game
is Hikaru Nakamura, the top-rated American player, not Magnus Carlsen.
Nakamura tends to play soundly in these time controls. Look at this video for
a game where Nakamura plays against Grandmaster Max Dlugy (another bullet
chess expert) with kibitzing by Grandmaster Ben Finegold:
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bzrap8Vtyq8](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bzrap8Vtyq8)

~~~
mmanfrin
Is not knowing your opponent part of the strategy? Carlsen played the 'tricks'
way he did because he knew, or felt reasonably certain that Gates would fall
for them. Critiquing his play based on what _you_ would do in Gates' position
is simply wrong, because I'm assuming the #1 chess player in the world would
play differently had he been playing against an international master such as
yourself.

~~~
jrs99
I don't think Carlsen was at all certain Gates would fall for those tricks. I
just don't think Carlsen would care if he lost. People are assuming a lot of
things. They're assuming that Carlsen wants to win at all costs. The same with
Gates. Carlsen did what he wanted because the outcome didn't really matter to
him.

Kind of like Gates beating Shaq in a basketball game and then analyzing the
strategy of each player to try to understand how that happened.

~~~
wamatt
_> People are assuming a lot of things_

> _" Carlsen did what he wanted because the outcome didn't really matter to
> him."_

Hmm.. didn't you just make an assumption too regarding Carlsen's state of mind
and motives?

Honestly both you and the OP seem to be engaging in pure speculation.

~~~
jrs99
no, i didn't assume anything. I reason that if you play a TRICK from the
beginning, you don't really care to win. You're playing for a good time. To
amuse non chess players.

------
throwaway_yy2Di

       1. e4    Nc6
       2. Nf3   d5
       3. Bd3   Nf6
       4. exd5  Qxd5
       5. Nc3   Qh5
       6. 0-0   Bg4
       7. h3    Ne5
    
       ╔═══════════════╗
       ║♜ … … … ♚ ♝ … ♜║
       ║♟ ♟ ♟ … ♟ ♟ ♟ ♟║
       ║… … … … … ♞ … …║
       ║… … … … ♞ … … ♛║
       ║… … … … … … ♝ …║
       ║… … ♘ ♗ … ♘ … ♙║
       ║♙ ♙ ♙ ♙ … ♙ ♙ …║
       ║♖ … ♗ ♕ … ♖ ♔ …║
       ╚═══════════════╝
    
    
       8. hxg4  Nfxg4
       9. Nxe5  Qh2#
    
       ╔═══════════════╗
       ║♜ … … … ♚ ♝ … ♜║
       ║♟ ♟ ♟ … ♟ ♟ ♟ ♟║
       ║… … … … … … … …║
       ║… … … … ♘ … … …║
       ║… … … … … … ♞ …║
       ║… … ♘ ♗ … … … …║
       ║♙ ♙ ♙ ♙ … ♙ ♙ ♛║
       ║♖ … ♗ ♕ … ♖ ♔ …║
       ╚═══════════════╝

~~~
pjungwir
I'm no expert, but since all the other comments are just complaining, here are
my (very amateur) thoughts:

1\. e4

The most common opening in chess. Bill knows he's supposed to bring out some
knights and bishops in these next few moves, which is good!

1\. ... Nc6 2\. Nf3 d5

Both black moves aim for an open center so he can make it a fast game with
plenty options to attack. His move invites Bill to waste a turn changing the
center from pawn vs pawn to queen vs nothing. To his credit Bill resists
capturing for a bit!

3\. Bd3

Doesn't make much sense to block your queen pawn like this. Of course he's
trying to support e4 or win d5, but he's tying himself in knots.

3\. ... Nf6 4\. exd5 Qxd5

Magnus is ahead in development.

5\. Nc3 Qh5

I'm sure Magnus would have played more conservatively against a better player.
But in this case, he might as well attack!

6\. 0-0

Seems like Bill stepped right into the line of fire here, but his blocked
queen pawn makes everything else hard to move.

6\. ... Bg4

Pinning the knight. This immobilizes yet another piece and makes Bill's queen
even more stuck.

7\. h3

Moving the pawns in front of your castled king usually weakens your defenses.
And hxg4 is suicidal.

7\. ... Ne5

Attack! Magnus is happy to give up material to gain time and open
vulnerabilities.

8\. hxg4 Nfxg4 9\. Nxe5

Getting greedy, but even if he did something else, was there was any way to
stop that queen?

I've lost games more quickly than Bill, and not to grandmasters, so props to
him for at least making reasonable moves.

~~~
GraffitiTim
That analysis looks fine except for the end.

At the end, Bill's 9. Nxe5 resulted in an immediate checkmate. Instead, 9. Re1
(Rook one square to the left) stops the mate since it gives white's king an
escape route. In an even match, the game would be winning for white at that
point because Magnus sacrificed a bishop for his now-failed attack.

Magnus screwed up big-time or was goofing around. He would still be able to
beat Gates from that losing position, but I'm very surprised he let that
happen.

~~~
eitland
I just watched the show on local tv and Magnus commented afterwards that he
did something against his principles and gambled that he could trick Bill into
it.

------
scotty79
As a kid I played a lot of chess with one of my childhood friends. I was
always (almost?) winning.

Imagine my surprise when in high-school I played with a guy who learned to
play chess as a kid. He beat me just as fast as Bill Gates got beaten. Then he
beat me, but slower in subsequent 7 games that day and then some over the
following months. But one day I finally beat him. I guess he got a little
careless after all that wins and I learned good bit from him.

Interestingly I beat his ass in checkers every time. Also interestingly
roughly about the same time I played chess with an actual math genius
(distance between two lines of his reasoning required whole page of careful
explanation for me) and he was making dumbest moves I've seen because he
barely ever played chess before.

Games are not about thinking. By thinking long and hard you can get to 5-10%
of skill of a master. The rest is learning from books and stronger opponents.

I had another friend. He had played significantly more unreal tournament than
quake, I just the opposite. I was kicking his ass 50 to 1 in quake even on a
slower computer with smaller monitor and crappier mouse, but he was kicking my
ass 50 to 1 in Unreal Tournament and I wasn't bad at that game. I was as good
as any of my friends except for this guy.

I guess my point is that skill is very specific to the game and must be
earned.

------
jljljl
"Bill Gates loses to LeBron James 232 - 0"

Not sure what outcome was expected...

~~~
dagw
The part that makes it news is that Bill Gates and Magnus Carlsen sat down and
played chess, not that Gates lost.

~~~
levosmetalo
Next time they should try doing a quick sort in Basic ;)

------
packetslave
Carlsen visited Google last week and played 10 simultaneous games against
Googlers. Chessbase did a writeup here:

[http://en.chessbase.com/post/carlsen-
google](http://en.chessbase.com/post/carlsen-google)

TL;DR: Carlsen went 10-0 with only one close game, against the highest rated
player (2168)

~~~
dudus
Not a very avid chess player but I had a lot of fun going over your game
notes. Thanks and congrats for the achievements in that game.

------
lifeisstillgood
There is a Derren Brown (UK Illusionist) piece where he plays seven opponents
at once, walking round in a big circle, and amazingly wins 4 out of 7.

Afterwards the explanation is simple - he played 6 masters or grandmasters,
and one guy off the street. And simply (!) memorised the moves of player A and
made them against player C, B to D etc. All he had to do was play a decent
game against the guy off the street and he would always beat 50%

~~~
pgopalan
This works only if the colors are reversed in subsequent boards. To avoid this
trick, all traditional simuls (short for simultaneous play - where one chess
master plays many people) have two simple rules: 1)The chess master has the
same color in all the boards 2) The color of the chess master's pieces are
usually white

Since white always makes the first move in a chess game, it is not possible to
copy the game from board A and play it in board B with reverse colors.

------
benjohnson
Make me appreciate Go that much more - to me, Go seems a much more enjoyable
game when the opponents are mismatched.

Even though I'm pretty good at Go, it's enjoyable to play with a beginner. You
don't have to trounce them to find satisfaction.

~~~
MichaelGG
I'm very new to Go, but I am continually impressed and amazed at its depth and
beauty. A few tiny simple rules producing such complex gameplay is really awe-
inspiring. Chess, with its many types of pieces, limited moves, many rules
just doesn't have the same elegance.

------
elorant
The amazing part for someone like me who knows just basic chess is how
aggressive Carlsen was. It’s scary seeing him coming on you with all those
pieces and instantaneous moves. It also gives you a measure of his grandeur.
It seems BillG got panicked given the little time he had to think his moves;
at least I’d do.

~~~
oldstrangers
Carlsen had a 30 second clock. Even an average player should've been able to
put Carlsen into time pressure at that point, assuming you didn't fall into
any silly traps like Gates did.

~~~
deletes
It is a trick actually. The more time the opponent has, the easier it is for
Carlsen, as he uses his opponents turn time to think. An average player
doesn't have the skill to put him under pressure.

+edit: you also usually get an extra second or two ( depending on the total
time ) per move.

~~~
georgemcbay
Yeah he has time to think when the opponent is moving, but 30 seconds just
isn't a lot of time if you consider there is a minimum practical time per move
just based on the physical reality of being a human that has to move the piece
and hit the clock, as illustrated pretty well by Carlsen's move where he
knocked over a piece and burnt something like 3 seconds on one move.

I think any decently skilled (but non-world-class) chess player could have run
him down just by playing defensively. Of course, that would have been terrible
tv, so we got someone who probably only plays casually getting steam-rolled by
the "Justin Bieber of chess".

~~~
oldstrangers
"Justin Beiber of chess".

'The Mozart of chess' is the general consensus. The 'Justin Beiber of chess'
is rather insulting.

~~~
prateekj
I couldn't agree more! Why would anyone come up with "Justin Bieber of Chess"?

~~~
georgemcbay
Freelance journalists aren't paid by the word anymore, they are paid by the
Bieber. No sense writing an article without the word Bieber in it, that's not
worth a dime.

------
stiff
Surprisingly this has brought some memories, I remember my father beating me
in a chess game exactly the same way in just a few moves, back when I was a
kid, my chess knowledge to this day sums up to knowing how the pieces move,
and my father I think knew some more chess theory regarding strategy, but
wasn't even a competitive player, so my laymen impression is that this was a
really unremarkable game.

Would someone competent at chess be so kind and explain what did Bill do
wrong? Does this class of mistakes (castling "locking" the king in the corner)
have a name?

~~~
raintrees
My dad once challenged me (again) and I really didn't want to play, so I ran
Fool's Mate on him (I had read it in some book of chess challenges). He never
asked again, it was kind of ruined for him... Gotta watch those teenagers, I
wasn't nice sometimes when my free reading was being interrupted.

Edit: glad I grew up some...

~~~
pzxc
Not to nitpick, but I'm sure you mean Scholar's Mate, where you attack the
pawn in front of the king's bishop with two pieces (usually queen and
bishop/knight) and win in 4 moves or so.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholar%27s_mate](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholar%27s_mate)

Many people erroneously call this fool's mate, but fool's mate is actually the
shortest chess game possible (win in 2 moves), which is virtually impossible
(you'd have to be playing against someone that really doesn't know what
they're doing AND they'd have to move the two specific pawns to allow it).
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fool%27s_mate](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fool%27s_mate)

~~~
raintrees
Thank you, yes, he moved a piece or two outside of the pattern, but everything
else worked a treat: Queen and Bishop trapped his King, I think maybe 7 moves
or so, including the stumbles.

------
samolang
If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole
life believing that it is stupid.

~~~
tspiteri
This was not about judging, it was just a bit of fun.

~~~
samolang
I know. I just thought this was a good illustration of this commonly stated
aphorism.

~~~
sklivvz1971
Some fishes climb trees.
[http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p003c3jk](http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p003c3jk)

------
deletes
They should play monopoly. The game would be over even faster.

~~~
garethadams
Bill Gates already won all the Monopoly in 2001

------
sayemm
Chess isn't his game, bridge is:

[http://www.buffettcup.com/Default.aspx?tabid=69](http://www.buffettcup.com/Default.aspx?tabid=69)

[http://www.thegatesnotes.com/Personal/What-Makes-for-a-
Good-...](http://www.thegatesnotes.com/Personal/What-Makes-for-a-Good-Bridge-
Partner)

[http://www.larryco.com/OldStuff/Gates4.html](http://www.larryco.com/OldStuff/Gates4.html)

------
haberman
It's funny because you know that in there somewhere Bill Gates must still have
his former extremely competitive self, and getting beat so badly has got to be
humbling. He's a great sport about it though.

~~~
visarga
Letting yourself get beat at chess, made fun of by talk shows or using self
deprecating humor are strategies for making people to like you more. He got
what he wanted, if he was just doing this to gain geek admiration.

------
willvarfar
I watched the Skavlan show tonight, and found the whole thing very fun. The
true story of Irish adoptions was particularly harrowing, but the chess match
lightened the load.

It didn't seem that Bill knew he was going to be asked to play chess, and he
seemed to take it in good humour.

Bill prefaced the game with apologies that nobody should expect much and that
he was a much better Go player.

------
avenger123
Respect for Bill. That was impressive.

I'm not an avid Chess player but to play at that speed with his obviously
gifted opponent and last that long is respectable.

~~~
goldenkey
There's nothing super special about an amazing chess player that would let
them check mate you in 9 movies unless you play horrendously. Grand Masters
are not super heros of chess. They are 'comprehensive.' Lets be real rather
than gaudy.

I should mention that I am a chess _master_ and have played GMs online.

~~~
mphillips2357
This. Bill is a smart guy but that doesn't mean he played impressively well at
all.

~~~
rizzom5000
Yeah, this looks like it was filmed live during a talk show. I highly doubt
there was any interest from anyone involved, especially the audience, for a
lengthy game.

------
pjmorris
The Gates biography 'Gates' by Stephen Manes recalls that Gates used to play
chess against Paul Allen a great deal in the early days. IIRC, Gates would
play very aggressively, leaving lots of opportunities to be attacked, and
Allen would usually win the games. He was more of a poker player though.

------
argumentum
> "Wow, that was fast," he said to Carlsen, whose rockstar appeal has won him
> the moniker the _" Justin Bieber of chess."_

 _" Justin Bieber of chess."_

really?

~~~
krapp
But... isn't Magnus Carlsen good at chess? I don't understand...

~~~
argumentum
What exactly is Justin Bieber _so good at_ to earn such a comparison? Not
singing, not composing music, not dancing .. no one has ever claimed he's the
"world #1" at anything other than being celebrity amongst other pre-teen
children.

And Magnus Carlsen is certainly not a celebrity amongst pre-teen children, so
the comparison makes no sense.

~~~
vecter
Bieber is actually quite a good singer:
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ko8gepM8MBU](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ko8gepM8MBU).

It's easy to lose sight of that given his stardom, but he got his start based
on raw singing talent.

~~~
argumentum
Of course he's likely in the top 0.001% of singing talent, but would you say
he's literally "the best" singer in the world regardless of age?

------
vacri
Gates should challenge Carlsen to a speed game of Write the Disk Operating
Sytem Before the Big Meeting Next Week, methinks.

------
tomato_sausage
Seeing as I went 16 moves against Kasparov as a complete noob to chess, does
that make me better than Bill Gates? My programming ability and checkbook seem
to disagree, however. :/

------
hawkharris
Bill Gates also famously plays cards and other one-on-one games with Warren
Buffet. I would love to have an insight into the conversations that take place
during those games.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oP1nAvi85g0](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oP1nAvi85g0)

~~~
wisty
Also, see
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontransitive_dice](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontransitive_dice)

Warren Buffet had a collection of non-transitive dice (dice with non-standard
numbers, with special properties ... basically a paper-scissors-rock set of
dice). He offered Bill a bet, and suggested Bill pick the dice first (and
Warren would then pick the dice most likely to beat Bill's). Bill, of course,
realised it was some sort of trick, and examined the dice, then suggested
Warren pick first.

------
lbolla
Best commentary of the match, by Jerry!
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0QdI0rVoHA&feature=em-
upload...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0QdI0rVoHA&feature=em-uploademail)

------
megablast
When you have all the openings memorised, as the champs do, it is not really
playing until 10 or 20 moves in. It is not really playing a game in this
situation, it is Magnus going through the motions.

~~~
gk1
That's only the case when _both_ players know the openings and follow
"textbook" moves throughout the opening. When playing against amateurs, you're
usually out of the memorized lines in just a few moves, so at that point it
just becomes tactical.

------
ExpiredLink
How long would it take you to lose against Mike Tyson in a boxing fight?

------
codegeek
How many moves did it take for Magnus to beat Anand ?

~~~
dubcanada
His final match was 58 moves

------
lazyant
3\. Bd3?

------
twobits
Well, when I was a child, my chess playing future was taken down in flames by
the chess program I had. In the easiest setting, I would lose in a few moves.
That proved not to be very motivating.

------
rfnslyr
Magnus Carlsen didn't start a billion dollar company, and Bill Gates isn't a
chess god.

Why is this article on HN? Who cares?

~~~
Bootvis
Because it's fun to watch and I must say I was surprised to see that a genius
like Gates played rather badly.

~~~
pachydermic
Yeah I'd say being smart doesn't necessarily help you play good chess - being
dumb hurts, though.

I wonder when the last time Gates even played chess? And even though he had
way more time than Magnus did, 2 minutes is not a lot of time... Most blitz
games are 3 or 5 minutes and if you're not an avid player (or at least used to
it) then it's really hard to play fast like that. Magnus probably didn't have
to think at all since he already knew the opening, whereas Gates was probably
on his own from the third move on.

Kudos to Gates for being a good sport.

------
bborud
What did people expect? For Bill Gates' bodyguards to break both of Magnus
arms and Bill taunting him "whatsamatter bitch? are you gonna move? tick-
tock".

Why is this on HN?

~~~
alexeisadeski3
MS-DOS 13

------
tedsanders
How is this news? Magnus Carlsen is good at chess. Bill Gates is bad at chess.
How does this story add value to anyone's life? What was learned here?
(sincerely curious)

~~~
prawks
Fun.

If people are more interested in either Bill Gates or Magnus Carlsen, then
here's a starting point. Many people likely don't know who Magnus is, now they
do. Bill Gates' involvement makes it more likely that people would have
watched the video.

Also, fun.

~~~
tedsanders
Hmm, I used to play lots of chess and still follow the chess world, so this
wasn't interesting or educational to me. But if people who aren't familiar
with chess or Magnus Carlsen still found it fun or interesting, then that's
good enough for me. :)

Thanks for your sincere reply to my sincere question.

