...and then he beats you anyway, because he's got a billion moves in his brain, not just one magically pivotal move that wins/loses the game. The whole "logic" behind replaying the same moves until you eventually beat him is also flawed. Your second or third move could send you into a no-win situation 10 turns later without you ever realizing it.
the Kasparov debate is too focused on chess and not enough on learning enough about him to make him fall in love with you/make him cry hard enough he can’t keep playing
Really respect his point about venting about people IRL, feel most streamers forgot or intentionally use the fact they have a major platform that can and has harmed people before.
aw man I've caught up to the Librarian again. I'm on egg time, but i'll rewatch this for the quality The Librarian adds to the original VODS. Some NL VODS dipped in Librarian's editing oil
Real talk, he ends the match in a draw 100% of the time, even if he has no idea that you're in a time loop. You would literally go insane studying chess theory for 100,000 lifetimes just to match what Kasparov's mind is biologically hardwired for. There is no conceivable way of winning without becoming a completely different person than the one who entered on loop 1.
@@p.a.3492In a classical game. How do you propose a normal person could beat him even after years of practice? Kasparov also has years of practice except with an extreme predisposition towards chess.
People saying it would take them 50-100 games to beat Kasparov just don't understand how good Kasparov was in his prime, he made the "regular" GM's from his time look like amateurs, keep in mind, these grandmasters were already studying chess all day long and were naturally talented at the game but still could not even come close to Kasparov (to be fair Kasparov himself was training like maniac too). A regular person could take a lifetime of intense training and never even come close to GM level, let alone prime Kasparov level. Even 60-year-old Kasparov would be insanely hard to beat for a normal person.
Shaun suggested a backtracking brute force algorithm and that just doesn't work. You can't brute force chess, famously. Even timeloop chess vs Determistic Kasparov.
The small amount of games is an insane claim, but if the game is repeated identically each day then yes most could beat him eventually given they operate with very fixed goals and infinite time. Each reset you would essentially just map out chess decision trees manually in the manner engines do. I think logically this would lead to a period of many many many draws, but eventually if you take games to end game reliably then your ability to replay the end game over and over should eventually afford you a blunder. Kasparov is still human and while hes going to be superhuman accurate in the end game, going from 100% accurate in the opening to 99% accurate in the endgame should eventually give a win. If Kasparov in any way alters his decision making one day to the next then yes it's almost impossible as you would then actually have to learn to the point you can beat Kasparov naturally which is almost impossible for 99.9% of people.
Bro even in the way you described it first, it would take years and years, nobody below 2200 rated will be able to determine if the board is favorable to them, maybe you made a mistake 9 moves ago and you have to start your decision tree all over again
Yeah even after years of going down branches of possible moves they would have to be extremely meticulous, cause I don't believe they could identify 99% of blunders Kasparov would possibly make. That is, after tons and tons of branches of possible games, most of which will result in a draw. I would guess 5 000+ games. (Of course, Kasparov was never infallible, and titled players losing to lower rated players is not unprecedented at all, but it's incredibly statistically unlikely.)
This chess discourse is gonna give me early onset heary palpitations "What if he wakes up 1 minute earlier.... and then he plays a different move" Its a fucking time loop, hes not gonna wake up earlier, hes not gonna do literally anything different beyond responding to your moves. For him, this is the first time hes ever met you.
NL talking about the Hvac funny man immediately made me think of Chib. Heard his name on the nlss a few times, but when he showed up, he was already fucking hilarious within the crew.
2:52 honestly I treat mr lion as number 2 funny. Second in command of funny. For me stewart lee is first, but Lee lacks the spontaneity of the lion, this streaming thing is a different medium and nl should respect his achievements within this context.
For the past 10 years I've wanted to stream sometimes, but when I see how good other streamers are I'm fine being a vod watchers. I don't want to interact with that many people at once !
Just switch colors each time and play Kasparov's own moves against him, getting one move further each time. If games take around 50 moves per side on average, you'll get there in around 100 games.
While this method probably won’t lead to a win it’s probably your best way to learn how to play Chess given you don’t have access to learning materials
@@vizualbI mean theoretically, Gary just thinks that it’s a normal game right? So couldn’t you ask him to coach you as you play? He seems like a nice enough guy, he’d probably be willing to at least give you analysis post-match
The other thing is, he's Gary Chess. He also remembers the games inbetween and will have a better memory of it then you do, he's spent a life learning this shit. You watch enough nuts chess streamers and eventually they will say something mad like, "oh yes, I remember this position I had this position against Dubov 12 years ago".
The issue with the hypothetical is people start to question thewir curtrent ability as some sort of metric to rule the infinitism you'd have to learn tyhe game. you know who LE:SE dsidnt have tables, charts, internet, and loads of books on chees? *The people that invented chees* lolol someone spent enough time and god willing - the effort to make chess very complex. so I digress - the hypothetical assumes you will EVENTUALLY learn how to beat him. Egg keeps making you think youre supposed to wage your own skill level current day . average player or not, know who else was an avegrae player? literally every pro ever. it's not a matter of IF, oit's a matter of WHEN. so ppl spit in the face of the hypotheitcl, and start to " win " th conversation by altering the deal. just answer the dang hypothitcal. how long would it take you to WIN. not how long would you take to ": give up/die/groundhog day/VN/romance/ " the hypotethical isnt trying to outwit you, it's trying to giuve the person asking it some insight to your brain/
@@frog6712no the point is if Kasparov has ever played a position in any of the hundreds of thousands of games that he’s played, his brain is so tuned to the game he will remember how to counter it and you will be starting from square one every time for decades
![could a misogynist do this? - Bits and Banter [03/26/2024]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VG3T7BrbF6s/mqdefault.jpg)
![could a misogynist do this? - Bits and Banter [03/26/2024]](/img/tr.png)
![old dads give new dads a bad rep - Bits and Banter [04/23/2024]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dDo5vAZmLpQ/mqdefault.jpg)
me when the sun emits a one in one septillion chance subatomic particle changing a 0 to a 1 in Gary Kasparov's brain so that he plays C4 instead of E4
Well frick. Missed the chance to play him during the eclipse. Sun might've got in his eyes and made him think your pawn was a bishop.
...and then he beats you anyway, because he's got a billion moves in his brain, not just one magically pivotal move that wins/loses the game.
The whole "logic" behind replaying the same moves until you eventually beat him is also flawed. Your second or third move could send you into a no-win situation 10 turns later without you ever realizing it.
@@paulunga you'd almost think the comment was making fun of that idea
I like the chatter that said "what if I made Kasparov fall in love with me?"
That was the librarian
"goofy when he takes himself too seriously" sent me lmao
33:15 a new voice has been unlocked
he wasn't lying when he said his bit is Funny Voices during Climbing Game
Somehow sounding even more White
Same vibe as Dave Chappelle speaking like a white dude
Best feeling is going on your lunch break and seeing a new bits and banter, gotta love the librarian
the Kasparov debate is too focused on chess and not enough on learning enough about him to make him fall in love with you/make him cry hard enough he can’t keep playing
Really respect his point about venting about people IRL, feel most streamers forgot or intentionally use the fact they have a major platform that can and has harmed people before.
"jimmy eat world? I'm waiting for the sequel, Jimmy shit the world out."
aw man I've caught up to the Librarian again.
I'm on egg time, but i'll rewatch this for the quality The Librarian adds to the original VODS.
Some NL VODS dipped in Librarian's editing oil
Joel me
@@HarveyJackson1967
How'd you do that
This titel combined with that thumbnail is the funniest stuff i seen in years 😂😂😂 you the Goat libreiain
12:18 he really red "time loop" and said "yeah but what if its not a time loop you dont know" bro thats the premise thats how i know
read*
The problem with “Play what Kasparov plays back at him” is that it’s more likely to end in a draw than anything else
Real talk, he ends the match in a draw 100% of the time, even if he has no idea that you're in a time loop. You would literally go insane studying chess theory for 100,000 lifetimes just to match what Kasparov's mind is biologically hardwired for. There is no conceivable way of winning without becoming a completely different person than the one who entered on loop 1.
@@confiteor266 the challenge isn't to be better at chess than kasparov, it's to beat him one single time.
nah, that's not how chess works
Just wear vibrating anal beads
@@p.a.3492In a classical game. How do you propose a normal person could beat him even after years of practice? Kasparov also has years of practice except with an extreme predisposition towards chess.
chess thing is so real. I'm close to finishing a PhD in particle physics. My chess ELO has never been above 1000
33:13 he's just describing Justin lol
People saying it would take them 50-100 games to beat Kasparov just don't understand how good Kasparov was in his prime, he made the "regular" GM's from his time look like amateurs, keep in mind, these grandmasters were already studying chess all day long and were naturally talented at the game but still could not even come close to Kasparov (to be fair Kasparov himself was training like maniac too). A regular person could take a lifetime of intense training and never even come close to GM level, let alone prime Kasparov level. Even 60-year-old Kasparov would be insanely hard to beat for a normal person.
That truly was a legendary way to introduce yourself to k8
Shaun suggested a backtracking brute force algorithm and that just doesn't work. You can't brute force chess, famously. Even timeloop chess vs Determistic Kasparov.
hungry Chris Hansen is just next level
He forgot the most important words before 'nut': "I'mgunna"
7:05 curious if NL has heard the first diss song, anything goes by cole porter 😂😂😂
the beating gary kasparov thing must be a joke. i refuse to believe anyone seriously said that.
The small amount of games is an insane claim, but if the game is repeated identically each day then yes most could beat him eventually given they operate with very fixed goals and infinite time. Each reset you would essentially just map out chess decision trees manually in the manner engines do. I think logically this would lead to a period of many many many draws, but eventually if you take games to end game reliably then your ability to replay the end game over and over should eventually afford you a blunder. Kasparov is still human and while hes going to be superhuman accurate in the end game, going from 100% accurate in the opening to 99% accurate in the endgame should eventually give a win.
If Kasparov in any way alters his decision making one day to the next then yes it's almost impossible as you would then actually have to learn to the point you can beat Kasparov naturally which is almost impossible for 99.9% of people.
Bro even in the way you described it first, it would take years and years, nobody below 2200 rated will be able to determine if the board is favorable to them, maybe you made a mistake 9 moves ago and you have to start your decision tree all over again
Yeah even after years of going down branches of possible moves they would have to be extremely meticulous, cause I don't believe they could identify 99% of blunders Kasparov would possibly make.
That is, after tons and tons of branches of possible games, most of which will result in a draw.
I would guess 5 000+ games.
(Of course, Kasparov was never infallible, and titled players losing to lower rated players is not unprecedented at all, but it's incredibly statistically unlikely.)
Deadpool 1 was a very entertaining movie, I shut off Deadpool 2 in about 15 mins, I realized 1 Deadpool movie is enough Deadpool.
This chess discourse is gonna give me early onset heary palpitations
"What if he wakes up 1 minute earlier.... and then he plays a different move"
Its a fucking time loop, hes not gonna wake up earlier, hes not gonna do literally anything different beyond responding to your moves. For him, this is the first time hes ever met you.
true, but also if you think a couple hundred attempts is enough to win, you're either a grandmaster or delusional
@@justacryptid4687 well duh, theres a happy medium here. I just think the idea that it would be impossible is weak shit
mr beast could make that chess hypothetical a reality
I'm gonna Hazel
30:21 tens of thousands of people learned that just because of this puzzle
He doesn't use ad block and it shows.
just commenting to say that "Sweetness" by Jimmy Eat World was actually in NHL 2003 fuckin casuals
4:15 title bit
4:21 this chatter is confused. They're thinking of clowns, not comics. Different art.
he said you only get 350 tries a year? Bro the tweet says the Loop resets when you lose.
NL talking about the Hvac funny man immediately made me think of Chib. Heard his name on the nlss a few times, but when he showed up, he was already fucking hilarious within the crew.
20:18 holy shit
3:05 just take the compliment lol sometimes being so humble comes off as arrogance.
2:52 honestly I treat mr lion as number 2 funny. Second in command of funny. For me stewart lee is first, but Lee lacks the spontaneity of the lion, this streaming thing is a different medium and nl should respect his achievements within this context.
For the past 10 years I've wanted to stream sometimes, but when I see how good other streamers are I'm fine being a vod watchers.
I don't want to interact with that many people at once !
Dont worry... you can stream for years to 0 people....
plus two plus two
Just switch colors each time and play Kasparov's own moves against him, getting one move further each time. If games take around 50 moves per side on average, you'll get there in around 100 games.
This would probably lead to a draw and not a win since chess results always lean towards a draw and kasparov is literally playing himself.
Is this a troll cause i saw this comment alot, or genuinely stupid, i never know
While this method probably won’t lead to a win it’s probably your best way to learn how to play Chess given you don’t have access to learning materials
@@vizualbI mean theoretically, Gary just thinks that it’s a normal game right? So couldn’t you ask him to coach you as you play? He seems like a nice enough guy, he’d probably be willing to at least give you analysis post-match
@@DogieParsley yeah, that's another lateral thinking approach that I think would work.
Well he's no Columbo
He is way too adjusted for the internet man. He's just a guy
Where is dlguiga? Haven’t seen him in a while.
he still shows up from time to time but between the new baby and being back to work im sure he's super busy
didn’t he lose the 5th harmony work from home bandle day?
hi haha hello hi hello
hi
:)
smile
+2 on ryan gosling again
The other thing is, he's Gary Chess. He also remembers the games inbetween and will have a better memory of it then you do, he's spent a life learning this shit. You watch enough nuts chess streamers and eventually they will say something mad like, "oh yes, I remember this position I had this position against Dubov 12 years ago".
the premise of the hypothetical was that he doesn’t remember the games
If he remembered the games just like you he would let you win so he'd also get out of the time loop...
This is so me when i dont have reading comprehension when its written "Garry will not remember any of the previous games". Brother, i beg you.
The issue with the hypothetical is people start to question thewir curtrent ability as some sort of metric to rule the infinitism you'd have to learn tyhe game.
you know who LE:SE dsidnt have tables, charts, internet, and loads of books on chees? *The people that invented chees* lolol
someone spent enough time and god willing - the effort to make chess very complex.
so I digress - the hypothetical assumes you will EVENTUALLY learn how to beat him.
Egg keeps making you think youre supposed to wage your own skill level current day .
average player or not, know who else was an avegrae player? literally every pro ever.
it's not a matter of IF, oit's a matter of WHEN.
so ppl spit in the face of the hypotheitcl, and start to " win " th conversation by altering the deal.
just answer the dang hypothitcal.
how long would it take you to WIN. not how long would you take to ": give up/die/groundhog day/VN/romance/ " the hypotethical isnt trying to outwit you, it's trying to giuve the person asking it some insight to your brain/
@@frog6712no the point is if Kasparov has ever played a position in any of the hundreds of thousands of games that he’s played, his brain is so tuned to the game he will remember how to counter it and you will be starting from square one every time for decades