Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic The Rybka Lounge / Computer Chess / I cannot Handle Engine Analyzes...
- - By Gizchehs Defender (***) Date 2012-06-09 14:18 Edited 2012-06-10 12:59
I cannot Handle all the ins and outs of letting a Chess Engine Analyze my Games.
It's way too Diffecult.
Reasons why:

1: Chess Engines play in another Style.
2: I am not sure about Elements of the GUI, so this makes me unsure and thus this is a Nuisance for my Perfectionism.
3: Technical Terms.
4: Different Playing Styles; he says that that's wrong, I say that that's right. He wants an open, Dynamic Position, I want a Closed, Solid Silent Position.
5: Harsh Calculation .VS. Principled play; ya he can create all those Weaknesses and not play ' Solid ' because he can calculate that far Ahead. For a Human this is impossible and thus a Human will never to rarely ( Intuition ) make such a move.
6: Pawn Structure; very Principled, I try to create absolutely no Pawn Weaknesses unless Necessary or just better, or Possible like with a Fianchettoed Potatoe Bishop. I see an Engine does Make those Pawn Weaknesses because he/she can Calculate!
7: Pawn Gambits: now this annoys me. I am not a Pawn Gambit Player as I want a Silent, Quit game.
And again the Engine goes into the Calculation way:

1.d4 d5 2.e3 Nf6 3.Nf3 g6 4.c3 Bg7 5.Qb3 O-O 6.h3 c6 7.g4 Nbd7 8.Rg1 Ne4 9.h4 Qb6 10.Qa3 Re8
11.g5 Qc7 12.Nbd2 Nd6 13.Be2 Nb6 14.Qb3 Be6 15.Qc2 Nf5 16.h5 Rac8 17.hxg6 hxg6 18.Rg2 Nd7 19.e4 dxe4 20.Nxe4 c5
21.dxc5 Nxc5 22.Nfd2 Nh4 23.Rg1 Qh2 24.Rg3 Red8 25.Nf3 Qh1+ 26.Bf1 Nxf3+ 27.Ke2 Bc4+ 28.Ke3 Qxf1 29.Rxf3 Rd3+ 30.Kf4 e5+
31.Kg3 Qg1+ 32.Kh4 Be6 33.Rxd3 Qg4# 0-1

At move 5... c5 Critter 1.4 says and I did a lesser move! While find that my King is Clearly Uncomfortable in this Position with a Queen-Bishop Battery!
And than also weakening the light Square c6?! where Defence can take place? and what about the Dynamics that I do not prefer?
It's just Calculation. Not Respect to Human chess Principles.

8: Correspondance Chess and Ego.

As you folks already know, I think long about my moves. I am a Correspondance ChessPlayer.
Now so I calculate and see Variations, try to look all over the Board, and yes, also ( always ) look for ( Positional-)Sacrifices.

And than here we have this Komodo3, who says that I could have done like 13-14 or better moves in a 19 Total ChessGame.
Giving me like ' Do you care about my Ego?! '

Komodo moves with that Bishop 4 Times

Komodo plays for odd Positions

Chess Engines just play very Different, and with another MindSet.

I think that they are only Usefull for (' Obvious ') Tactics that is within Reach of the Human Brain, and for Forced moves, and for Calculating the best ( Positional ) move every Time, in Revue, without a Plan, without a Strategy, with smoother handle of the Principles because they can Calculate.

How do you handle your Chess Engines Analyses?

I hope that I can give the games I would like to be analyzed in here.
Analyzed by a Human Brain, with Computer assistance ofcourse, because you can Handle the Engines :surprised:.

Uly already Helped me :smile:
Parent - By Labyrinth (*****) Date 2012-06-09 16:09
The way I use computer analysis is I will play a chess game, look at it myself first extensively. I might after some time move the pieces to create a few variations to make sure I'm visualizing things correctly.

I might then look up the opening in some database to see if what I played was really unusual, or quite common and consider what the reason might be for it. I might look at another player's treatment of the same line for insight.

Then I browse through the game with infinite analysis. If I don't intend to look at the game too seriously, and just search for blunders, I will use Fritz 8 which is strong enough to tell me if I've really messed something up.

To look more deeply I will use any of the top engines and might even give them plenty of time (like over night) if I'm really curious as to the engine's line and evaluation in a particular position. Usually though I can just look through the game with infinite analysis and see the evaluations fluctuate. The larger the change in eval the more likely it is to be correct in my experience.

If I think the move the engine is suggesting is quite wild, I may look for the engine's alternatives. If the evaluations aren't too different, I may choose to follow a 2nd or even 3rd engine choice.

This way I can use computers to get a better idea of what happened in a chess game, and compare my own analysis to something that's likely closer to the "truth".

I don't play correspondence chess or freestyle, or much chess at all these days so my needs may be different than yours.
Parent - - By cyberbrain (**) Date 2012-06-09 18:50
Modern chess engines are much stronger than humans. So why doubt them?
You should learn to play more like them.
What human GM can beat houdini 2.0c under tournament rules and without odds? Reply: Nobody

Houdini 2.0c 3319 elo
G. Kasparov 2851 elo

and you?...
Parent - By tano-urayoan (****) Date 2012-06-09 23:40

> You should learn to play more like them.

and How the **** you do that?
Parent - By Labyrinth (*****) Date 2012-06-10 00:05

>You should learn to play more like them.

Within reason.

Some moves are as Kramnik called them "Very very computer". It doesn't work well to try and play this way since coming up with such moves on your own more or less requires a computer-like process as opposed to a human-like one.
Parent - - By Gizchehs Defender (***) Date 2012-06-10 12:52 Edited 2012-06-10 13:00
My Elo rating is 3320 but that's an Old Joke :mad:

Say that my Peak Rating is the equivalent of one Draw against Rybka 2.3.2a mp 32-bit in a Shuffle Chess Game [ Chess 960. without Castling ]

I already knew that they are around 600 points strong than the Officially, Formally, strongest Human Being on Earth now.
I mentioned that it's Diffecult for me to use them on Analyzing Chess Games, I often cannot understand their Moves and think they make their moves with the help of Brute Calculation, which means that it is Practically Impossible for a Human Being to make such a same move where Brute Calculation helps the Chess Engine.

Ofcourse, in ( very ) Tactical Situations, it may be better to behaviorally listen to them.
Parent - - By Pia (****) Date 2012-06-11 15:04
But I heard rumors that Doctor Pi won against Rybka 4 1.5/0.5 blindfold!
Parent - By siah (***) Date 2012-06-12 06:33
He is a software.:lol:
Up Topic The Rybka Lounge / Computer Chess / I cannot Handle Engine Analyzes...

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill