Analysis program woes

Originally posted by Varenka
And that's precisely why I keep my RHP rating under 2000.... I hate opening study. 😉

veeery sneaky! 😀

Originally posted by wormwood
kasparov thinks opening study is not relevant under 2000.



I kinda lean towards what you said though, about general understanding of typical positions. but that's not really opening study, is it? related and directly caused by the choice of opening, yes, but not really opening. more like general knowledge you should get down anyway.

I am sure there is a large difference in what Kasparov considers "opening study" and what an 1800 thinks.

That being said, studying pawn structures, minor piece imbalances, endgames relating to your opening can loosely be tied into opening study and I would say is critical to improvement.

Originally posted by nimzo5
I am sure there is a large difference in what Kasparov considers "opening study" and what an 1800 thinks.

That being said, studying pawn structures, minor piece imbalances, endgames relating to your opening can loosely be tied into opening study and I would say is critical to improvement.

yeah, I suppose so. no reason to define things too restrictively just for the sake of having a clear division between different aspects of the game. especially if such classification hinders the understanding of the game as a whole. the reality is always flexible and continuous, not a segmented series of neatly separable independent concepts.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
No 2 choice after 5 minutes.

How many million positons did it look at?

Morphy flicked it out after a few moments without even looking at the board.

Apparently most of his time was spent trying to watch the Opera whilst the Opera
singers were wondering what all the noise was coming from the Duke's private box.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphy_versus_the_Duke_of_Brunswick_and_Count_Isouard

I tried throwing a little fuel on the fire, but nobody's taking the windup bait. :'( I did find a few more engines that give some consideration to 8.Nc3. Critter 0.90, Gambit Fruit 1.0 beta 4bx, and Toga II 3.1.2 SE JA.

"How many million positons did it look at?"

I asked Houdini this question, and it replied, "None of your business. Don't bother me, I'm trying to watch an opera on the internet right now." (Dang engine has an attitude.)

Originally posted by Mad Rook
I tried throwing a little fuel on the fire, but nobody's taking the windup bait. :'(

You need to work on your baiting skills. Speak to GP, he’s a master baiter. 😉

There are two kinds of opening study, one is good for everybody, the other is good for GM's, and Carlsen Odinson himself doesn't really do it.

Looking at an opening and looking at the ideas behind the moves, how said opening affects centralization, development, activity, is good for everyone. Looking at plans, ideas you can use to improve your position, or general strategy based on an opponent's reply is great for everybody. Throwing a bunch of pieces off the board and playing out endgames with the pawn structures is great for everybody.

Just memorizing opening analysis, without any though to what your doing is bad business. GM's can memorize variations like that because they have so much chess knowledge in their heads it's easy for them to work out plans.


The only exception to this is of course the Colle System, it's pawn structure clad in purest shimmering samite, which holds aloft an unstoppable advantage, signifying by Divine Providence that the white is to carry the game 😉

grrr... The Colle isn't an opening, it's an request for a draw so you can get to the pub faster.

Players who are not schooled in the divine drawing death of the Colle will often play the Exchange Slav/QGD w/nf3 or Exchange French or just play their usual English attack and drink the pint at the board while they crush another hopeless Sicilian.

I'm not too sure about avoiding opening lore all together.

There is no harm and plenty to be gained from looking at and
studying what I call the childish openings. (A lot of which I play myself).

Danish, Goring, Blackmar, Latvians, Englunds etc etc.
The stuff you won't see on a GM's table.

Without this tactical and developing background there will be gaps.
Also these openings are very popular at the lower levels so you may
end up (no you will end up) getting crushed and demoralised before you
have earned your spurs.

You will outgrow them (well you should) and when playing over 2000
you will need more than a few cheapo's and a good tactical eye to progress.

(Although at the board I'm always thinking...today is the day...
The Masterpiece...My Mona Lisa...My Immortal...and off I go tripping down
ga-ga land.)

It's a fine balance.
Certainly booking up soley on the Lopez and expecting to play it like
a Fischer when you are 1400 is a no no.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Can anyone post anything they have learned from a computer?

I was Black (to move) in this recently completed RHP game. I failed to find a plan to make progress and soon the game was drawn. However, the computer was able to demonstrate some very notable ideas here. One aspect was something I've never really paid much attention to but should now keep in mind. Another aspect was to highlight a weakness in my thinking that I have seen in my other games.

GP- Agreed. I would rather see an aspiring player toss out gambits than the Colle, the London or such. When you are 2000 playing the open games, than it's time to start playing d4 or c4...
Wish someone had told me that when I started out.

Originally posted by Thabtos
There are two kinds of opening study, one is good for everybody, the other is good for GM's, and Carlsen Odinson himself doesn't really do it.

Looking at an opening and looking at the ideas behind the moves, how said opening affects centralization, development, activity, is good for everyone. Looking at plans, ideas you can use to improve your position, o toppable advantage, signifying by Divine Providence that the white is to carry the game 😉

The only exception to this is of course the Colle System, it's pawn structure clad in purest shimmering samite, which holds aloft an unstoppable advantage, signifying by Divine Providence that the white is to carry the game - thabtos

beautiful, truly beautiful! how many games must we post before this self evident truth arises from the bottom of the ocean in a monumental march towards the rising sun casting all enemies into the abyss below!

Hi V.

Your post is pretty vague.
You have not said what you learned, just you did learn something.


One pawn and a rabid Knight for the exchange.
(That a8 Bishop has a future too, look at those white squares
on both sides of the board.)

Once the Knight goes to e5 it has a paralysing effect on White.
Infact the threat of Ne5 is enough (save it up).
Black has the plus in active ideas.

I'd say White is 'wait and see' territory. In a human this is near fatal.
They get impatient and sooner or later they must bust out for activity.

(What ever you do holding this type of postion as white is never move
a pawn unless you are triple-triple sure it will not rebound. - see below.)

Just don't give him a chance to chop that Knight with Rook.

Plan.

All the Black pieces, including the King can take up more active postions
than those of White's. So spike up the position and see what happens.

So what was it you learned from the box?

I'd say it was nothing you did not already know.
You just forgot that you already knew it.

You know how to shuffle around in a plus postion probing for the blunder,
which must be the plan in the above game.

I've seen you do it. Game 1737407 from 2006. (given below.)

Look out for the desparate pawn push from Black boys - [move 6]
and how V steps in and bounces it right away.
Can he still get in if Black keeps shuggling the Rool along the 7th?

A good game this V. Clean, human and instructive.
You fixed him good. Black is reduced to moving a Rook along
his 2nd rank.

V. you don't need a box to tell you what you missed, you are way past that.
Switch it off and forget it's there. The tool has become a crutch.

We join the game at the instrucitve bit.

Varenka - etecka RHP 2006

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi V.

Your post is pretty vague.
You have not said what you learned, just you did learn something.

[fen]b7/p3k1pp/1p1p1r2/2p5/2n1p3/2P1P1KP/P4PP1/1RBR4[/fen]
One pawn and a rabid Knight for the exchange.
(That a8 Bishop has a future too, look at those white squares
on both sides of the board.)

Once the Knight goes to e5 it has a paralysing e ...[text shortened]... 7 14. Bf6 Rb7 15. Bxg5 Kg7 16. Rxf7+ Rfxf7 17. Rxf7+ Rxf7 18. Bxf7 Kxf7 19. Bd8[/pgn]

Yes I was being vague. I wanted you to have a look at it before I mentioned what I learned from the computer.



You know how to shuffle around in a plus postion probing for the blunder, which must be the plan in the above game.

No, Black shouldn’t shuffle around. The pressure can be increased without White making a mistake. White is struggling here; maybe even lost.

I considered plans with putting my knight on e5; or knight on d3; or bishop on d3. But I need to consider all the Black pieces, and that includes putting the Black rook on d3! But doesn’t White’s well placed rook on d1 prevent that? Although I know - without the computer - that I should consider attacking well placed pieces, I don’t consider it readily enough. Even if the computer is not introducing a new concept, it’s still a useful lesson if it’s something that is lacking in my play.

So a plan is to drive the White rook from the d-file and occupy d3 with my own rook. So, Bc6 followed by Ba4. Note that Black has no time to “shuffle” since White is “threatening” Ra1 and a4, preventing Black’s plan. After Ba4, White can play Rd5 when the rook is further hassled with h6/Ke6/etc. Or White plays something like Re1 when Black goes Rf5-d5-d3. Can White prevent the loss of the c3 pawn, followed by Black’s majority on the queenside becoming too dangerous?!

I fail to see how gaining the above insight is any less beneficial than some feedback from a stronger human player. I'm not saying that strong human feedback isn't useful but I don't regard it as the only option.

Originally posted by Varenka
YAlthough I know - without the computer - that I should consider attacking well placed pieces,

after a zero-ply analysis, just by looking at the position: white doesn't have ANY well placed pieces. ANY attack against them would only serve white. if that's what the engines wanna do, I think they have no clue and are just randomly shuffling pieces. as usual.

your advantage here is a superior position, and now it's time to put that to good use! dilly dallying with positional shuffling only gives white time to sort himself out. your advantage isn't a permanent one, and given enough time you'd end up in an endgame down an exchange. don't shuffle, attack!

I think you should be crashing through kingside head first. what can white do, block his worthless pieces even more by walking the king towards queenside? surely white must be absolutely lost. only some unlikely miracle tactic (which might well exist) could save him.


now when I get this far, this is the first time I'm even considering any concrete moves. first you get the plan, THEN start looking how to achieve it. THIS is what engines do well, much better than us, but the problem is they never get here.

of course, this is how I run things. I'm sure defensive players play it completely differently. (and end up with a disappointing draw.)

and now we just need some strong player to come and tell us how it really is. 🙂


(cheaters need not apply, we already have the engine side of things covered.)