Chess and Go run in my family. As a product of western society, I grew up playing Chess. However, my dad, who grew up on mainland China, is a lifelong Go player. We are different in similar ways. Each of us knows the basic rules of the other game, though we are by no means experts in the craft. Even within our own niches, our skills are nothing to write home about. However, I do believe that through all the tournaments I have played and games that I have analyzed, I have a solid foundation in chess theory (for reference, my unofficial ELO rating at the time of writing this post is ~1700). On the other hand, my father’s advocacy for Go (he likes to bring it up in conversation) has taught me about the ins and outs of Go as well. Thus, though I am no Grandmaster chess player or 9 dan Go aficionado, I do know enough to be curious about the differences between the games. With this curiosity, I often wonder the useless yet complex question: which is “harder”?
The Basics:
Chess involves 6 unique pieces, each with a different movement pattern. In chess, there are many different possible combinations of moves which lead to a lot more rules to remember and follow. The objective in chess is to checkmate the opponent. The checkmate is quite a sophisticated concept that can be achieved in many beautiful ways and involves a rather deep level of understanding. Go on the other hand involves only one type of piece and one type of move. The piece is placed down on a vertex and cannot be moved from the spot unless it is eaten by the opposing player in a future move. The objective in Go is much more abstract and cannot be pinpointed by a concrete outcome like checkmate. Instead it is best summed up as “control more territory than your opponent”, where “territory” is loosely defined. In fact the Chinese word for Go literally translates to “surrounding game”.
From the get go, it is obvious how different these two games are. The two share almost no similarities other than the fact that they are played on a square board and are separated into black and white pieces. When considering only the basic logistics of the game, Chess is indubitably the harder game to learn. In chess, players not only have to remember basic moves and certain special moves such as castling, they also must understand exactly HOW to win. A check and a checkmate are strictly defined but can occur in a large number of ways. Go has a much nicer learning curve and requires the player to only remember the one rule on “Qi”. Otherwise, the rest of the game can be played by pure intuition! Even the act of winning often only happens when the two players have agreed for a game to end. The winner is implied when the game ends, as both sides have a clear idea of who controlled more territory. As such, the verdict is that chess is harder to learn.
Complexity and Computability:
Now that the basics are out of the way, strategy and complexity come into play. This is where numbers and tactics take center stage. We are no longer only concerned about HOW to play but also how BEST to play.
Chess is played on an 8 * 8 board. 20 possible first moves exist for each player, leading to 400 total board possibilities after the first move. Each player starts with a certain number of pieces and the number of pieces on the board can never be more than the starting number (32). Often this means that during the opening of a game, the number of possible next moves in a certain position will temporarily increase with each move since pieces are being developed from their claustrophobic starting positions. However, towards the middle and end of the game, move possibilities will continuously shrink as more exchanges happen and the number of pieces left on the board gradually decreases. In fact, from personal experience, it is practically impossible to consider the tree of outcomes from EVERY single move at the beginning of a game, but becomes almost necessary towards the end, due the sheer lack of possible moves.
Go on the other hand, is played on a much larger 19 * 19 board. In addition to the large size, the number of possible Go moves on just the first move is literally the number of vertices on the board. In total, the first player has 361 options and the second will have 360, leading to a whopping 130,321 total board combinations after the first move! In Go, the number of possible next moves is almost directly proportional to the number of open vertices left (I say almost because there is the slight possibility that a vertex is illegal). However, due to the fact that pieces can both be placed AND eaten, the board never truly fills up! This means that on the off chance that a game is played where not a single piece is eaten and no illegal moves exist, there are 361! -1 possible go outcomes (the last move filling up the board is logistically impossible). However, considering that games often result in pieces being eaten as well, there are now (and this is not an overstated hyperbole) infinite possible Go games.
For this reason, Go is easily the more complex game. Go is a game that for all I know, cannot be “solved”. It is impossible for a player to sit and try to hash out all the possible moves to strategize and determine which one is “best”. There simply are too many moves! In chess this IS possible. Sure it would still take way too long for a human to carry out such a task and Grandmasters did not get to be Grandmasters by memorizing all the possible games, but it is still possible. Computers such as Deep Blue have already proved their worth by defeating some of the greatest chess players of all time. No such machine exists in Go. In chess, it is well within a computer’s processing power to analyze all possible moves. Additionally, since chess is less subjective, computers have an easier time placing a quantifiable value on the quality of a chess move. A very clear and near-perfect series of decisions can then be derived. In Go, the quality of a move, especially at the beginning of a game, is impossibly difficult to quantify due to the nature of the game. Burdened with both exponentially more moves to consider, and higher difficulty judging a move, computers have yet to best professional Go players. Go takes the cake for complexity and computability.
The Human Aspect:
Finally, we get to the spirit of the games. I may have just gone to great lengths trying to prove Go is “harder” and requires more computational power (which in human terms pretty much means intelligence) than Chess, but these games were never meant to be played by machines. As with all games in history, the human aspect of the game is what makes it so and allows games to transcend above just an impossibly difficult math question. The root of both games is ultimately to out-smart and out-wit your opponent, crushing them in a civilized way. So which game requires more wits? More intuition?
The nuances of Chess lie in deception and guts. When faced off with a true equal, playing it safe and calculating as far as your brain can think will only take the game down a boring and uneventful path towards a draw, not to mention take an agonizingly long time. Playing by studied-and-proven book moves will result in a similar outcome. This is most clearly demonstrated in a hypothetical match of a Chess supercomputer against itself. Assuming each computer moves along the same decision tree, the game will have been predestined to draw! Thus what makes chess chess is that leap of faith, that gambit you hope will pay off eventually, the guts to make a counterintuitive and uncalculated sacrifice to throw your opponent off. It is the equivalent of distracting your enemy and flanking them rather than facing them head on. Chess players need to be cunning and display a graceful ferocity while constantly being alert for reciprocation from the opponent. Chess is a ruthless war.
The nuances of Go lie in experience and foresight. As previously stated, Go is an intuition-driven game. It is an act of instinct to place a piece down in Go. Proficiency in Go comes from game after game of trying and either failing or succeeding. Through this repetitive process, the player builds up a strong feel for the game, correcting any of their flawed intuition through prior experience. But even a “strong” feel for the game is not a “perfect” feel for the game. In fact, almost nothing in Go can be classified as absolutely “wrong” or “right”. Subjectivity is at the heart of the game. Even the most experienced players will eventually come across a situation they have never seen. Thus foresight is required. There is absolutely no point in trying to achieve the impossible by calculating the outcomes of a game. Go is truly the embodiment of “let the chips fall where they may”. Go is a peaceful river of fate.
Conclusion:
Go and Chess are too different to be compared in the same scope. Each is, indeed, more “difficult” than the other in some aspects yet “simpler” in another. Ultimately, the preference comes down to taste. What kind of a person are you? Based on that, which game is more up your alley?
Sean Lin's Blog 