Musk compared chess with checkers, which was solved in 2007, arguing that computers can eventually map the entire game. Chess.com responded to his claim with a blunt “Skill issue.”
BY PC Bureau
September 11, 2026: Elon Musk has predicted that chess will eventually be “fully solved” by computers, comparing it with checkers, which was mathematically solved in 2007. But world No. 1 Magnus Carlsen, speaking in India on Thursday, was unwilling to endorse the prediction, saying he was “not a computer expert” and did not know whether chess would ever be solved.
Writing on X this week, Musk argued that most legal chess moves are so weak that artificial intelligence could eventually map the entire game. Chess.com responded with a blunt two-word reply: “Skill issue.”
Musk repeated his argument, saying chess is “hard for humans, but not for computers” and would eventually be solved “like checkers.”
He later said he had spent the evening “arguing with some random intern” on the Chess.com account. The company responded that the person running its account was a full-time employee, not an intern.
The exchange has revived a longstanding question in the chess world: can the entire game eventually be calculated from the starting position to a definitive result?
For Carlsen, the answer remains uncertain.
Asked about Musk’s claim on Thursday at the Global Chess League in India, the five-time world champion said he could not say whether chess would ultimately be solved.
“I’m not a computer expert, so I don’t know if it’s going to be solved,” Carlsen said.
He nevertheless suggested that chess is already “semi-solved” in practical terms.
“We are pretty sure that it’s a draw, and it’s a draw in a tonne of ways. The margin is quite big,” Carlsen said.
The distinction is important. A game being “solved” does not simply mean that computers are vastly stronger than humans or that engines can analyse positions to extraordinary depths. A mathematically solved game requires a complete strategy demonstrating the outcome — whether the starting position is a win, loss or draw with perfect play, and how that result can be achieved.
Checkers reached that point in 2007 after computers completed an exhaustive analysis of the game. Chess, however, is vastly more complicated, with an enormous number of possible positions and variations, making a complete solution far more difficult.
READ:
Chess is hard for humans, but not for computers. One day, it will be fully solved like checkers.
Between now and then, or even after, have fun. People enjoy many games/sports where machines are vastly better.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 4, 2026
Modern chess engines have nevertheless transformed the game.
Carlsen said computers have made chess more accessible to spectators, allowing fans to follow engine evaluations during games and better understand positions that might otherwise be difficult to interpret. For players, increasingly powerful engines have accelerated preparation and improvement, allowing them to identify mistakes and explore variations at a level far beyond traditional human analysis.
The debate over whether chess is ultimately solvable comes as artificial intelligence becomes increasingly embedded in competitive chess. Engines can calculate variations far beyond human capability, while elite players routinely rely on them for preparation.
READ: From Yogi’s UP to Adhikari’s Bengal — The BJP’s Food Politics Paradox
But Carlsen remains focused on the human side of competitive chess.
Speaking about the Global Chess League, where he is playing for defending champions APL Pipers, he backed the competition’s white-versus-black team format, in which matches are staggered and the team result is usually decisive unless all six games are drawn.
Carlsen also criticised the two-second increment added after move 40, saying it was introduced “on the request of players who are incompetent and lazy at times.”
The Norwegian also spoke about his visits to India, where he has become a regular presence as the country’s chess ecosystem has expanded.
“I need a year off to remind myself how crowded the tournaments are,” he said. “But parts of it I really enjoy. There’s no atmosphere or enthusiasm like it in the east.”
The contrasting views of Musk and Carlsen underline one of the most intriguing questions in modern chess. Computers have already surpassed humans in calculating the game, analysing positions and helping players prepare. Whether they can one day go further and completely solve chess remains an altogether different question.
For Musk, chess is ultimately a computational problem waiting to be exhausted. For Carlsen, it remains a game whose practical boundaries have been dramatically reshaped by machines — even if its final mathematical answer is still unknown.
