Shredder 11

Hi everyone,

I've just aquired a copy of Shredder 11 and wonder if any of you have used it and how I should best use it to help me improve my game.

I am grateful for all ideas and opinions.

Originally posted by lordgledhill
Hi everyone,

I've just aquired a copy of Shredder 11 and wonder if any of you have used it and how I should best use it to help me improve my game.

I am grateful for all ideas and opinions.

you should've gone with Rybka 3 instead. but anyway. The main thing you could make well use of these kind of super strong engines is analysing your games, blunderchecking, checking out practically any tactical sequence cannot understand of your own, or try to see if your calculations about a tactical puzzle was right including the sub-variations.

you could also use their databases, create your own opening repertuare for CC, and probably many more things I cannot think of right now.

the most important thing to remember though is, to not be lazy and leave all work to the engine when analysing. The best thing is to try to analyse yourself as much as you can (not whole games necessarily, but at least the critical moments), and only then check out with the engine.

by the way, I prefer "infinite analysis" instead of full game analysis because it's interactive.

side note: I believe working mainly on tactics (with puzzles etc) is the best way to go for almost anyone below 1800.

I tend not to play computers, not the super duper ones anyway.
(I have Grommit which is good for a work out - and Fritz 6 which
is hardly used at all).

They don't make human mistakes so you lose the ability
or never gain the ability to punish human errors.

I got good without computer help (so why am I posting on here?)
All I can say is don't use it like a crutch and be very careful it
does not stifle your own creativity.

I would listen to these guys though because used correctly I'm
sure a computer can help.

But I know it can also cause a lot of damage that may take loads
of OTB losses to correct.

Fat Lady, Korch, diskamyl, Dragon Fire and a few others may amble by
and give you some good advice how to get the best out of it.
I'd take onboard what they have to say.

I personally think you would learn more from sitting down in a quiet
room with a good chess book moving the pieces about on a standard set
for a few hours, than you would watching silly little graphics ponce
about on a screen.

Your OTB battlefield vision will be 3 squares by 3 squares.
You must learn how to read a full sized chessboard.

Greenpawn (the old fart)

Originally posted by diskamyl
you should've gone with Rybka 3 instead. but anyway. The main thing you could make well use of these kind of super strong engines is analysing your games, blunderchecking, checking out practically any tactical sequence cannot understand of your own, or try to see if your calculations about a tactical puzzle was right including the sub-variations.

you cou ...[text shortened]... ing mainly on tactics (with puzzles etc) is the best way to go for almost anyone below 1800.

Well, Rybka 3 has lots of bugs in the endgame and only runs on Windows. Plus, Shredder 11 has a unique style. There are reasons to get either.

Originally posted by exigentsky
Well, Rybka 3 has lots of bugs in the endgame and only runs on Windows. Plus, Shredder 11 has a unique style. There are reasons to get either.

could you tell more about shredder's style? is it defensive, positional, aggresive?

I don't think Rybka 3 has any serious bugs discovered yet, could you give examples?

Originally posted by greenpawn34
I tend not to play computers, not the super duper ones anyway.
(I have Grommit which is good for a work out - and Fritz 6 which
is hardly used at all).

They don't make human mistakes so you lose the ability
or never gain the ability to punish human errors.

I got good without computer help (so why am I posting on here?)
All I can say is don't us ...[text shortened]... 3 squares.
You must learn how to read a full sized chessboard.

Greenpawn (the old fart)

"I personally think you would learn more from sitting down in a quiet
room with a good chess book moving the pieces about on a standard set
for a few hours, than you would watching silly little graphics ponce
about on a screen. "greenpawn34"

I could'nt agree more

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Your OTB battlefield vision will be 3 squares by 3 squares.

Too true! 🙁

Originally posted by diskamyl
could you tell more about shredder's style? is it defensive, positional, aggresive?

I don't think Rybka 3 has any serious bugs discovered yet, could you give examples?

Shredder has a solid but balanced style. It is good all round but probably stronger than Rybka in the endgame while weaker in the other phases. Comparing recommendations might be helpful sometimes.

As for Rybka's endgame bugs, check the forums. The most annoying is probably the blind bishop bug where Rybka incorrectly evaluates the position as a win. Sometimes Rybka plays poorly by design because if the knowledge were added to make it play well in a certain rare position, it would cost speed and lower general playing strength. This is a design choice.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
I tend not to play computers, not the super duper ones anyway.
(I have Grommit which is good for a work out - and Fritz 6 which
is hardly used at all).

They don't make human mistakes so you lose the ability
or never gain the ability to punish human errors.

Greenpawn, you should dust off your copy of Fritz 6 and play using the sparring mode feature. I think you'll find it interesting. Hit the game tab and go to levels to find it.

As for the original post, engines can really help you improve your opening play. Playing against the computer forces you to make accurate moves in the beginning. If your opening theory isn't sound, you'll quickly pay the price.

Originally posted by exigentsky
Shredder has a solid but balanced style. It is good all round but probably stronger than Rybka in the endgame while weaker in the other phases. Comparing recommendations might be helpful sometimes.

As for Rybka's endgame bugs, check the forums. The most annoying is probably the blind bishop bug where Rybka incorrectly evaluates the position as a win. S ...[text shortened]... rare position, it would cost speed and lower general playing strength. This is a design choice.

ok thanks.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
I tend not to play computers, not the super duper ones anyway.
(I have Grommit which is good for a work out - and Fritz 6 which
is hardly used at all).

They don't make human mistakes so you lose the ability
or never gain the ability to punish human errors.

I got good without computer help (so why am I posting on here?)
All I can say is don't us ...[text shortened]... 3 squares.
You must learn how to read a full sized chessboard.

Greenpawn (the old fart)

I have to say i've found paying against strong chess programmes a great way to improve my play, I even favour it now over my once preffered method of training which was to play over master games covering the game score and trying to guess the next move.

This is beneficial to an extent but unfortunately there never seems to be enough said about the moves i would have chosen. With a computer you know straight away if a move was weak and why because it punishes you straight away. A great ay to learn! Also when i sit down for a match at my local club, unfortunately I don't have Alekhine or Tal sitting next to me whispering their genius remarks. Playing computer programmes helps develop the greatest skill a chess player can aquire. The ability to think for yourself!
I have to agree on the issue of engines not making mistakes though, it is very tough getting in to positions where you can force an advantage and attack. I tend to stick to chess problems and puzzles for this type of training.

Just thought I'd thank everybody for sharing their thoughts vis-a-vis the best way to incorporate computer chess into my learning.

Cheers,

lordgledhill

All good advice so far. I'd only add that if you're trying to go through a book, say an opening repertoire, DO IT WITH A LAPTOP as well. Why? In a database program, you can go through the positions move by move on screen, and then it's alot easier to enter variations and jump back to the main line with ease. You can then play it over and over jumping between variations and get a real good sense for the feel of the opening. Not to mention adding your own notes for reference.

I used to study on the board only and wasted time resetting the board to a key positions before proceeding. Sometimes you can just picture the variation in your head, but alot times you can't (I can't anyway). It's real annoying to get to move 25, then have the author refer to back to move 16. You have to reset back. With a database program you just click move 16 and voila! Believe me you will save a lot of time.

PLUS, it's always interesting to try out new ideas that perhaps were not covered in the book or you feel unconvinced. Just hit go and play against the computer!

Chessbase is great for this and I'm sure all the other popular interfaces are too.

I like using a laptop for books as well, and it's great when you can download the pgn's that go along with the book. I just don't like playing games against the computer while on the computer. I don't mind logging on to this site for correspondence, but I just can't sit at a computer and play goo long games. This is why I started the thread about the Novag Citrine chess computer. I'd like to play more practice games but want to get off the computer, so an OTB computer seems like a great choice.

so wich one is best frit11 shredder or rybeka.