When Bill Gates recently appeared on the Norwegian/Swedish talk show Skavlan and was crushed by Magnus Carlsen in a chess game, he claimed to be pretty good at Go. Since he also said his chess rating was about 1600 ELO, I became curious about his go ranking. Could he be a dan-level player? Does anyone know?

The interview is on youtube. The quote and game is late in part 2. BTW, he played horribly - probably (hopefully) far below his potential.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMoKpLKWurM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJSr0-6wg0Y

I seem to remember reading somewhere he was kind of kyuish. But I don't recall where.

_________________
Still officially AGA 5d but I play so irregularly these days that I am probably only 3d or 4d over the board (but hopefully still 5d in terms of knowledge, theory and the ability to contribute).

He played horribly? 1600 is around sdk level no? Grab an sdk and get them to play blitz with Lee Sedol. They won't look like an sdk.

This.

Also I have seen Bill Gates playing bridge with a sponsored partner in high-level tournaments. He is obviously interested in Mind Games.

For what it's worth: In the Kido Yearbook that reported on my five-dan rank (gained by winning six out of six games in a grading tournament against other prospective five-dans in the Nihon Kiin, and a very pretty piece of paper it is too...), there's a report of an honorary five-dan diploma given to a certain ウィリアム・ヘンリ・ゲイツ (William Henry Gates). To add insult to injury, they spelled my name wrong.

Note that the Japanese astronaut who played through a famous game while in orbit was granted a one-dan diploma.

Interesting info! Sounds like there is a real possibility that he actually is dan level. But do honorary diplomas have any correlation with real world skill? For instance, can we at least assume that he is a better player than the astronaut?

To the others: I didn't mean to insinuate that he is a horrible chess player. I fully understand the circumstances - playing against a young hotshot world champion who is especially strong at blitz and who is out to humiliate him on live TV. I just said he played horribly in that game. I'm absolutely sure he himself would be the first to agree, as would the hypothetical sdk ...

Not much.

By all accounts, the Japanese astronaut barely knew the rules of go before being persuaded to participate in that game....

Mind you, I'm not claiming that Nihon Kiin diploma ranks are that impressive, either.

I always assumed that honorary ones were a reflection on the size of the pocket. Which means he must be pretty bad if he did not get a 99 dan diploma.

_________________
Still officially AGA 5d but I play so irregularly these days that I am probably only 3d or 4d over the board (but hopefully still 5d in terms of knowledge, theory and the ability to contribute).

I would assume it's more a reflection on the size of what comes out of the pocket.

_________________
http://tchan001.wordpress.com
A blog on Asian go books, go sightings, and interesting tidbits
Go is such a beautiful game.

Gates is a complete beginner in chess (think 25-30K in go terms). No one who has any idea about the game would play white's third move no matter the opponent or how nervous they are. From my personal experience in both chess and go 1600 chess ELO would be roughly equivalent to high SDK ranks.

I have to agree, even if I was thinking Gates was just overly nervous. I'd dart to play d3, even if it has been ages since I played chess. F3 if I felt very fancy. Heck, even advancing the pawn...

_________________
Geek of all trades, master of none: the motto for my blog mostlymaths.net

FYI, taking the pawn is the best move and gives white significant advantage. Later on Carlsen plays a bad piece sacrifice which can be defended in one easy to spot move, but Gates instead prefers to get mated in one move. As I said, no way he's 1600 ELO @ chess.

edit: pawn is defended by the queen so he wouldn't be losing it. However he would have to take back with a queen and white then could gain tempi by playing Nc3. Anyways, I'll shut up now with this derail.

Oh right, it's undefended (due to the weird queen knight) Sure, take.

_________________
Geek of all trades, master of none: the motto for my blog mostlymaths.net

I have tried to reconstruct the chess game from the video:

1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d5 3.Bd3 Nf6 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Nc3 Qh5 6.O-O Bg4 7.h3 Ne5 8.hxg4 Nfxg4 9.Nxe5 Qh2#



Well, 3 Bd3 looks weird but it is at least not a direct blunder. In fact, we have a direct blunder in this game by Magnus Carlsen, namely his 7. move Ne5. After 8. hxg4 Nfxg4 9. Re1 there is no immediate danger for white, and black is simply a piece down. After the game, Magnus confirms exactly that and explains that his move 7 was meant as a kind of trick move.

IMHO such thing wouldn't happen, if a Go professional played against an amateur in a public video.

No need to reconstruct: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1744566

but well done, anyway.

_________________
Offending ad removed

I can't tell if you're seriously saying Carlsen didn't see he was losing a piece. Obviously he played trick moves because he was handicapped very severely (30 seconds with no increment on his clock). And Bd3 is a blunder, albeit not a tactical one. It's terrible positional move that beginners frequently make - blocks your central pawn, misplaces his bishop, makes further development harder by hemming in his queen and dark square bishop.



Seriously ? You honestly believe that go professionals would never make a trick move in a friendly fun game under a huuuuuuge handicap?

That was the detail, which I overlooked. Well - under these circumstances - forget my previous post

That could possibly explain the Nihon Kiin's funding of the Seattle go center, No?

No. That had nothing to do with it.

...and wouldn't the money be in the opposite direction, if so?