# Jordan vs. Kasparov: Who beats whom first? **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [June 4, 2012, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030 "2012-06-04T14:45:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/101 "2012-06-07T20:03:54Z")
**Little Nemo** was positing simultaneous games, in which case the “first to win” is determined by which game is over more quickly. Although I’m reasonably confident that that’s not what the OP meant, I was playing along. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/102 "2012-06-07T20:10:23Z")
**Chessic Sense** , it’s not enough just to stipulate that the players are immortal. OK, so they’re immune to old age. Are they also immune to the Sun dying? How about to the heat death of the Universe? All of the protons in their bodies decaying? Those would all happen long before Jordan built up a large enough repertoire of Kasparov’s games. Not to mention, if you’re magically giving Jordan’s brain enough memory capability to remember that many games (and it _would_ be magical), you might as well give Kasparov’s brain enough processing ability to calculate the trajectory of the ball and the precise neural impulses needed to send to his muscles. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/103 "2012-06-07T20:10:31Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > Interestingly, Jordan can just ape whatever Kasparov did in the last game, forcing the grandmaster to constantly innovate against his own play.. I don’t think so, since one change, made by Kasparov, makes aping the prior game’s play a terrible choice. You do realize that chess grandmasters would have studied as many of Kasparov’s games as they could get their hands on prior to playing him, and still get beat. For competitive fairness, I would say they have immortal split personalities. On the court, both players are at their physical primes, at the board, both are at their mental primes, and they play one game per day until the universe ends. I still give Kasparov the injury edge. ---
**Author:** ![Nars\_Glinley](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nars_glinley/32/8177_2.png) [@Nars\_Glinley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nars_Glinley)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/104 "2012-06-07T20:13:18Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > Because they didn’t play enough games together. I’m assuming both players are immortal and they’re both devoting their entire time, money, and attention to winning this contest. So let’s say Jordan gets to expert level after 4 years of training and Kaspy has the conditioning and shooting precision of a 50-year old Russian after equal training. > > After so many chess games together, say 200 or 300 or more, Jordan will have effectively been trained by Kasparov himself, albeit unwillingly. Interestingly, Jordan can just ape whatever Kasparov did in the last game, forcing the grandmaster to constantly innovate against his own play. > > Little by little, game by game, Kasparov’s repertoire meets the light of day and Jordan can fine-tune his play against it. Eventually Kasparov resorts to inferior moves and Jordan capitalizes. > > On the basketball court, however, Kasparov is never going to get “trained by” Jordan, no matter how many times they play. This would seem to assume that we all have the same mental capabilities as far as learning chess is concerned. I don’t think that’s a valid assumption. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/105 "2012-06-07T20:14:03Z")
> [@enomaj](#): > > ETA: Oh you’re talking about moral victories. No, I’m assuming Jordan will lose the chess game no matter what he does. And Jordan will win the basketball game no matter what Kasparov does. So I invented an arbitrary standard to decide who beats who “first” - the guy who wins faster. Jordan will beat Kasparov in forty-eight minutes - the length of a basketball game. So if Jordan can slow down the chess game to forty-nine minutes, he’ll have beaten Kasparov “first”. Jordan beat Kasparov in forty-eight minutes and Kasparov beat Jordan in forty-nine minutes. ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/106 "2012-06-07T20:18:55Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > No, I’m assuming Jordan will lose the chess game no matter what he does. And Jordan will win the basketball game no matter what Kasparov does. > > So I invented an arbitrary standard to decide who beats who “first” - the guy who wins faster. Jordan will beat Kasparov in forty-eight minutes - the length of a basketball game. So if Jordan can slow down the chess game to forty-nine minutes, he’ll have beaten Kasparov “first”. Jordan beat Kasparov in forty-eight minutes and Kasparov beat Jordan in forty-nine minutes. Yeah, that makes sense… ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/107 "2012-06-07T20:19:49Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > I don’t think you understand the premise. The question was whether Jordan will win at chess before Kaspy wins at basketball. Jordan beating Kaspy at basketball means nothing and grants no victory. Even if they play 100 basketball games first and Jordan wins every one, he _still_ doesn’t win the contest until he checkmates Kasparov. > > Further, I have no idea why you’ve postulated simultaneous games. The OP wasn’t all that clear on what the premise was. But if we accept your premise - that the two men play back and forth until one of them loses their “strong” game to the weaker opponent, then I’ll go with Kasparov winning. Kasparov and Jordan are both 49. Let’s assume they’re in comparative health. In those circumstances, I’m guessing their physical abilities will fade before their mental abilities do. In twenty-five years, Kasparov will retain more of his chess playing superiority than Jordan will still have of his basketball playing superiority. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/108 "2012-06-07T20:23:33Z")
Now if you’re assuming immortality, then I don’t anticipate either man will ever match their opponent’s ability. Kasparov will never play basketball as good as Jordan and Jordan will never play chess as good as Kasparov. The two men will just keep winning their own games until one of them goes insane and loses the ability to play. ---
**Author:** ![enomaj](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/59ef9b/32.png) [@enomaj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enomaj)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/109 "2012-06-07T20:33:59Z")
I was going for a who beats whom at their respective game first. Does Jordan beat Kasparov at chess or does Kasparov beat Jordan at hoops first. I think the consensus is neither will ever happen. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/110 "2012-06-07T20:47:55Z")
My thought experiment has it as a Groundhog Day type thing, like Bill Murray they relive each day but they can change themselves, they can learn along the way. I still don’t think either one wins. ---
**Author:** ![Maserschmidt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/maserschmidt/32/18829_2.png) [@Maserschmidt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maserschmidt)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/111 "2012-06-07T20:49:05Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > Because they didn’t play enough games together. I’m assuming both players are immortal and they’re both devoting their entire time, money, and attention to winning this contest. So let’s say Jordan gets to expert level after 4 years of training and Kaspy has the conditioning and shooting precision of a 50-year old Russian after equal training. > > After so many chess games together, say 200 or 300 or more, Jordan will have effectively been trained by Kasparov himself, albeit unwillingly. Interestingly, Jordan can just ape whatever Kasparov did in the last game, forcing the grandmaster to constantly innovate against his own play.. This might surprise you, but Kasparov played a LOT of games before he first met Karpov over the board, and Karpov had access to those. Somehow that fine tuning failed to pay off in superiority. I’ll also point out that improvement in chess has a natural limit regardless of hours spent working at it…some people spend substantial time studying and can’t break the 2000 barrier, for example. We have no idea what Jordan is capable of learning, but I’d guess that particular mental muscle hasn’t gotten a ton of exercise since college. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/112 "2012-06-07T21:45:43Z")
To be fair, it’s tough to saw what a human might be able to learn if they had a thousand years to study it. Maybe a couple of centuries would be enough to break through that 2000 barrier. ---
**Author:** ![nudgenudge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9f8e36/32.png) [@nudgenudge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nudgenudge)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/113 "2012-06-07T22:27:18Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > Interestingly, Jordan can just ape whatever Kasparov did in the last game, forcing the grandmaster to constantly innovate against his own play. That’s not right. Kasparov merely has to introduce a move that Jordan hasn’t seen yet. There is an astronomical number of possibilities that he will not know how to respond to. If you’re thinking of that conjuring trick in which one expert player unwittingly plays against another, it’s not like that, because Jordan is actually required to come up with moves himself. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Borgia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_borgia/32/156_2.png) [@Larry\_Borgia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Borgia)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/114 "2012-06-08T16:54:29Z")
> [@Alka\_Seltzer](#): > > I think the lesson of this thread is that more people appreciate what makes Jordan exceptional than Kasparov. In practise, they couldn’t play each other enough times for the underdog to have a significant statistical chance of a win, without external factors such as injury, ageing or death taking precedence. This is it. Jordan’s size strength and grace are easy to see. When you look at Kasparov, all you see is some guy thinking. “Well Jordan is a smart guy, so he can think too,” you might say. People just don’t see that it’s more than just being a smart guy, just as beating Jordan isn’t simply a matter of going to the gym, getting fit, and hiring a basketball trainer. ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2012, 8:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/115 "2012-06-09T08:28:36Z")
> [@nudgenudge](#): > > That’s not right. Kasparov merely has to introduce a move that Jordan hasn’t seen yet. There is an astronomical number of possibilities that he will not know how to respond to. If you’re thinking of that conjuring trick in which one expert player unwittingly plays against another, it’s not like that, because Jordan is actually required to come up with moves himself. Well, exactly. And Kaspa doesn’t even need to vary all that often: Game 1. Kasparov plays 1. d4 and goes on to win. Game 2. Jordan plays 1. d4. Kasparov responds 1. … Nf6 and goes on to win. Game 3. Kasparov plays 1. d4, Nf6; 2. c4 and goes on to win. Game 76. Kasparov plays 1. d4, Nf6; 2. c4, reaches a position which would be a dead loss against another GM, and goes on to win. Game 104. Kasparov plays 1. d4, Nf6; 2. c4, reaches a position which would be a dead loss against an IM, and goes on to win. Game 105. Kasparov decides he’s strung Jordan along enough, and while the basketball jock is still hopelessly out of his depth, Kaspa plays 1. d4, Nf6; 2. g3 and goes on to win. Game 1001. Kasparov plays 1. h4, Any; 2. a4 and goes on to win. (He’s nowhere near out of orthodox opening choices yet, but decides it would be fun to waste his first two moves.) …etc > [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > This is it. Jordan’s size strength and grace are easy to see. When you look at Kasparov, all you see is some guy thinking. “Well Jordan is a smart guy, so he can think too,” you might say. People just don’t see that it’s more than just being a smart guy, just as beating Jordan isn’t simply a matter of going to the gym, getting fit, and hiring a basketball trainer. Yah, and there are one or two people in this thread who ought to know better. ---
**Author:** ![Alka\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Alka\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alka_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2012, 11:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/116 "2012-06-09T11:03:14Z")
**glee** has had a pretty good stab at explaining what an exceptional chess player Kasparov is, I’ll try a different tack. Kasparov was beaten 3.5 to 2.5 by the Deep Blue chess computer in 1997. However, Deep Blue was capable of analysing **200 million chess positions per second**. It was supplied with a comprehensive [opening book](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opening_book) and [endgame database](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endgame_database), and evaluation parameters were determined by analysing thousands of games between human players. Although Kasparov narrowly lost, he did win one and draw three of the six games. It’s staggering he could compete with that much raw processing power, and IBM refused a re-match. The idea that Jordan could learn simply from playing against Kasparov or play a strong game by rote is absurd. If there are, say, on average ten valid moves for a player on each turn, there are a million possible board positions a mere six moves ahead. ---
**Author:** ![Lochdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/edb3f5/32.png) [@Lochdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lochdale)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2012, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/117 "2012-06-10T02:26:02Z")
As good as Jordan was, did he not benefit from the subjective nature of NBA referring? Such blatant subjectivity doesn’t appear to exist in chess. Unless you’re Bobby Fischer. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2012, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/118 "2012-06-10T03:11:49Z")
> [@Alka\_Seltzer](#): > > **glee** has had a pretty good stab at explaining what an exceptional chess player Kasparov is, I’ll try a different tack. Kasparov was beaten 3.5 to 2.5 by the Deep Blue chess computer in 1997. That’s all well and good but, Kasparov himself says a computer will beat any human today. The problem with your comparison is that Deep Blue was using brute force analysis, not (mainly) logic. Stated how many moves were “contemplated” by a computer is meaningless as it is more a measure of computing power and not chess skills. > [@Alka\_Seltzer](#): > > The idea that Jordan could learn simply from playing against Kasparov or play a strong game by rote is absurd. If there are, say, on average ten valid moves for a player on each turn, there are a million possible board positions a mere six moves ahead. Does Kasparov actually contemplate a million board positions? No. Which means all this _theoretical_ complexity tells us little about an elite player actually plays. That said, the argument that he could just ape whatever Kasparov does is fairly silly. What would benefit Jordan is being able to first become a good to very good chess player thought traditional means. Then, use the tactics, strategies, and tendencies of Kasparov against him. I don’t mean just copying his moves, I mean sitting down with experts who have beaten Kasparov and learning why he does what he does in certain situations. Then you can use computers to analyze every move, steadily adjusting and changing strategies according to best practices. Now, in a given lifetime, this may not happen. But given an eternity, and good health, I expect that to happen before Kasparov beats Jordan. And that’s a knock on Kasparov, it’s just nature of the two things. There are far more tools and people trying to help others leverage their “intellectual” gifts as opposed to physical gifts. ---
**Author:** ![bldysabba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ecccb3/32.png) [@bldysabba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bldysabba)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2012, 8:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/119 "2012-06-10T08:51:02Z")
I’m sold on it being impossible for Jordan to beat Kasparov at chess. The other eventuality seems more likely. Also, did nobody else watch the video of the CEO vs. Jordan? He puts in a couple of consecutive baskets. Is that only because Jordan is kidding around? I also have another suggestion - suppose they were allowed to nominate a (human) champion in their stead for the game they were weaker at. Who beats whom first? ---
**Author:** ![Alka\_Seltzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c89c15/32.png) [@Alka\_Seltzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alka_Seltzer)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2012, 10:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030/120 "2012-06-10T10:34:16Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > Stated how many moves were “contemplated” by a computer is meaningless as it is more a measure of computing power and not chess skills. Not true, there is a direct relation between search depth and game playing strength. I’ve implemented a learning draughts-playing program, so I do know what I’m talking about. > [@brickbacon](#): > > Does Kasparov actually contemplate a million board positions? No. Which means all this _theoretical_ complexity tells us little about an elite player actually plays. You seem to have missed my point. I’m not saying this is how elite chess is played, I’m simply trying to give people some idea of how strong a player Kasparov is in terms they can understand. He can compete with a computer capable of analysing billions of board positions during the course of a game. I’m also refuting **Chessic Sense** ’s idea that Jordan could play a string game by rote, the phase space is far too large. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-vs-kasparov-who-beats-whom-first/624030.md?page=7)