fall to

MingBei

Senior Member
Chinese
Hi everyone:

"Chess fell to the machines in 1997, when Garry Kasparov lost a match to Deep Blue, an IBM computer."

How to understand the phrase "fell to". Does that mean machines can be number one in Chess or Machines can be applied enthusiastically in Chess?

Thank you.

Ryan.
 
  • entangledbank

    Senior Member
    English - South-East England
    Chess was captured or conquered by machines: just as Constantinople fell to the Turks in 1453. Humans were 'defending' their championship skill in it until that date.
     

    kentix

    Senior Member
    English - U.S.
    When a city or other location is captured by an enemy force the standard terminology is to use the verb "fall".

    They are afraid that Moscow will fall to the Germans.
    Rome fell to the Allied forces in 1944.


    So human chess ability fell to computers in 1997. It was conquered.

    Of course that's a bit of an exaggeration. It's not all or nothing like when a city falls and is occupied.
     

    MingBei

    Senior Member
    Chinese
    When a city or other location is captured by an enemy force the standard terminology is to use the verb "fall".

    They are afraid that Moscow will fall to the Germans.
    Rome fell to the Allied forces in 1944.


    So human chess ability fell to computers in 1997. It was conquered.

    Of course that's a bit of an exaggeration. It's not all or nothing like when a city falls and is occupied.
    Thank you! I got that.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top