Is Chess24 much better than Fischer Random for top human?

[Chessqueen]

Is Chess24 much better than Fischer Random for engine vs engine or it is only better when human vs human are playing ?

Here Magnus is explaining how to play Chess960, but he forgot to mentioned that for Black and White the pieces have to be placed symmetricaly. It is interesting that Magnus mentioned that in Chess960 position in order to avoid losing you are pretty much forced to play symmetrically, or did I misunderstood what he meant ? ==>

[lkaufman]

Is Chess24 much better than Fischer Random for engine vs engine or it is only better when human vs human are playing ?

Here Magnus is explaining how to play Chess960, but he forgot to mentioned that for Black and White the pieces have to be placed symmetricaly. It is interesting that Magnus mentioned that in Chess960 position in order to avoid losing you are pretty much forced to play symmetrically, or did I misunderstood what he meant ? ==>

I never heard of "chess24" but I'm guessing you meant "chess324" which I have promoted. Chess324 is primarily superior to 960 for engine vs engine (or engine-assisted play such as correspondence) play, because it is much less drawish, but for genuine human vs human play 960 is not too drawish so that's not a big factor. It does have the advantage of being (usually) asymmetric and so perhaps a bit more interesting and exciting, but I think that Magnus didn't mean that all or even most 960 positions had to be defended symmetrically, just that some did. Even normal chess is most typically only symmetrical for one move, since 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c5 is rare and 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 is not as common as 2...Nc6. 960 seems to work pretty well for humans; today for example in Iceland 10 of the 16 quarterfinal games were decisive, and of the six draws all showed about a pawn or more advantage for one side at some stage according to Stockfish, which although it is not a true pawn equivalent, is enough to mean that the superior side had good practical winning chances in games between human grandmasters. So not a single game where neither player had serious winning chances at any point; you would never see that in 16 games of Classical chess at this level. Even the best humans just make too many mistakes when they can't play the entire opening by memory. Today Carlsen blundered a rook for a knight in one game (still drawing!!) and a full rook in another, in each case simply missing a check in reply to his move followed by a capture of a rook! Of course it was Rapid, but he wasn't terribly short on time. A couple days earlier in a normal (Rapid) chess game. Duda (probably one of the three best Rapid players in the world) won a queen for a rook from Mamedyarov for only modest positional compensation, and then managed to lose the game (but still won the match). As long as the players don't start thinking when the position is already very drawish, someone will usually make a serious mistake, and the opponent will have serious chances to win.