|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 14 OF 15 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jun-23-11
 | | LIFE Master AJ: # 1.) Engine analysis is always different than analysis by a human. # 2.) Many times, I have seen the engine go crazy, and give White (or Black) a large edge. Yet - just a few moves later - this flattens out to maybe a a small edge for one side. (Showing engines are far from infallible. Where did the overwhelming edge go?) # 3.) No human can defeat the best computers anymore, that's an absolute fact. # 4.) I would put ANY of my analysis up against any real persons. (With or without an engine.) ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** What gets me is that so many people - on the Internet - pretend to be a strong player. But without proof, its all a lot of "hocus pocus." |
|
| Jun-23-11 | | Colonel Mortimer: <LIFE Master AJ> <#2.) Many times, I have seen the engine go crazy, and give White (or Black) a large edge. Yet - just a few moves later - this flattens out to maybe a a small edge for one side.> You didn't see it on this occasion..
A E Franklin vs A J Goldsby, 2011 <LIFE Master AJ:> <Really bothersome ... why does Fritz show an evaluation that one side is winning ... when it has to be able to see the draw?> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <What gets me is that so many people - on the Internet - pretend to be a strong player.> <But without proof, its all a lot of "hocus pocus."> I agree with you on this..
Your 'proof' suggests you are rated 2200 USCF (a defunct master title) - in reality you are 100 points weaker than this as evidenced by your 70% loss statistic against players rated 2200+ (Source: http://main.uschess.org/datapage/ga...) |
|
| Jun-23-11 | | fab4: Ofcourse 'engine' analysis is essential today. it would be stupid to suggest otherwise.. But I think <TheFocus> is getting at what I'm getting at.. namely on this site there are waaaay too many posters who use 'engine' analysis as either their own analysis, or as a crutch to prop up their own inferior chess ability. So what we get as an end product is not their own opinions but silicon. |
|
| Jun-23-11 | | SimonWebbsTiger: @fab4 and the Focus
I have found the live GM commentaries on playchess.com or the Internet Chess Club intriguing when they get onto, as they invariably do, the question of engines, analysis and human understanding of chess. I am a complete computer illiterate so I don't know the first things about Fritz 12, etc. I am glad I bought my tech savvy countryman Christian Kongsted's book "How to Use Computers to Improve Your Chess", Gambit 2003. I recommend it to fellow computer illiterates because Christian talks about the limitations a computer has (e.g. the horizon). Back to the GMs. I have heard them say interesting things like: forget the eval of this endgame because computers, the tablebases, only go to 5-6 men. Or: a computer will say this position is playable but it would be impossible for a human. There are many such interesting expert comments. That computers are good in post-game analysis became obvious to me when Fritz 12 found a winning knight sacrifice at move 14 in the opening of one of my games. Neither I or my vastly higher rated 2170 ELO opponent saw it during the game or in post-mortem. I showed him the sac a day later and he philisophically remarked: you have to be Fritz or a GM to see a move like that! |
|
| Jun-23-11 | | TheMaddHatter: I don't think there is any pretending to it AJ. Everybody that frequents this site is most likely a chess fanatic and there are plenty strong players here. Houdini isn't going to make a patzer look like a champ anywhere, especially here. And most people are happy to admit when they're not that good. Give the ego a rest and give people a chance before you break out the LifeMasterSwatter and you might make a friend or two. |
|
| Jun-23-11 | | TheFocus: <LIFE Master AJ> <What gets me is that so many people - on the Internet - pretend to be a strong player. But without proof, its all a lot of "hocus pocus."> <AJ> Nice to see that you STILL read my posts even though I am on your IGNORE list. His <hocus pocus> is directed at me. I used that in a little poem about me. <AJ> my master's title is real. Live with it. |
|
| Jun-23-11 | | TheFocus: <AJ> Go ahead. Start up again. Show everyone that you can't maintain the truce. And I will fall on you like a ton of bricks. |
|
Jun-24-11
| | LIFE Master AJ: Another one for my magical list! |
|
Jun-24-11
 | | perfidious: Poor <TheMaddHatter>-five posts only, and he has ascended to that wonderful club to join some of us who've been around a while longer and have no tolerance for what has gone either for all these years. How many spots are allotted to The Chosen? Is it 40, as I've seen claimed? 100? Infinite? The truce has been nice, but I sense someone here coming to the end of their tether. Dear fellow kibitzers, I wish all of you luck when this reaches its likely end. |
|
| Jun-24-11 | | DrMAL: <LIFE Master AJ: The trick is to avoid those moves like 18...Nd5? (??)> 18...Nd5 alone was not particularly bad, just rather dubious (perhaps inaccurate is a better term), but it also defined black's theme for later inaccuracies all centered around the same theme of attacking without sufficient prophylaxis. Naka's decisions on moves 21 and 26 underlined this theme, whereas Carlsen's prophylaxis with 21.Bc1 went the opposite way, losing tempo. |
|
Jun-24-11
| | LIFE Master AJ: I won't argue with you - nor do I really disagree.
At this level - it usually takes more than one bad move to lose, unless the move in question is just a flat out blunder. |
|
| Jul-14-11 | | Ulhumbrus: On 33 gxf5 Re5xg5 34 Rxf5 gxf5 35 h7+ Kg7 36 b3 Nac3+ 37 Ka1 Rh8 38 Bb2 Kg6 Black is still hanging on. This may be worth looking at further. One thing suggested by the resource of b3 and Bb2 is that White's bishop becomes a very powerful piece with White's pawn on h7. |
|
| Jul-14-11 | | timhortons: <Engine analysis is always different than analysis by a human.> your analysis is better than that of an engine you mean? |
|
| Aug-03-11 | | cludi: This is my video analysis of the game
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kyy3... |
|
| Mar-19-12 | | LoveThatJoker: 39. Rxg7 Ne7 40. Bg5 Rg8 41. Bxe7 Rxg7 42. Bf6! is an easy win. LTJ |
|
| Mar-19-12 | | sevenseaman: I liked 22. Nc5, a good thinking move. (I was a little stuck here). |
|
Mar-19-12
 | | HeMateMe: Inspired pun! Of course, you had to know that <Karnak> was a Johnny Carson creation, which ended around 1990. Ed McMahon: Oh Karnak the magificent! In this hermetically sealed (always) envelope, [the after/before clue for Karnak] it reads "A Pasadena Wacko Jacko Sacko." Johnny Carson: What happens when Bobby Fischer and Michael Jackson tackle a quaterback? Ed: You are corret Sir! Hyoooooooooo...
Johnny: Ed, what do we have for these nice audience members? Ed: A hot dog-for-one! |
|
| Mar-19-12 | | AVRO38: Carnac was great but my favorite Carson character was Art Fern the Tea Time movie announcer who would always get caught making out with the Matinée Lady. Carson will always be the king of late night, in a class by himself. |
|
| Mar-19-12 | | LoveThatJoker: For the sake of completion, it should be noted that 39. Rxg7 Re6 40. Ng6 Rxg6 41. Rxg6 is also a straight-foward win for White. LTJ |
|
Mar-19-12
 | | Felipe38: I think after 39-Rxg7 if black respond 39-...Ne7 the best answer for white is 40-Rxe7!Rxe741-Ng6+ winning a piece and the end will be easy for white to win. |
|
Mar-19-12
 | | Penguincw: Just like how he always does it. Wait for his opponent to go wrong, and boom. Gets the full point. In this case, Nakamura captured the rook. |
|
| Mar-19-12 | | Garech: Fantastic game by Magnus; as always everything flows beautifully and works harmoniously; in my opinion he is the new Capablanca and it is only a matter of time before he is World Champion. Cheers,
-Garech |
|
| Mar-19-12 | | kevin86: The rooks take over this one. |
|
| Mar-19-12 | | Diademas: Nice!
Its the first time they have used a pun of mine.
Hope you liked it. |
|
| Mar-19-12 | | LoveThatJoker: <Felipe38> Your line is nice and original! Note that my line of 39. Rxg7 Ne7 40. Bg5 Rg8 41. Bxe7 Rxg7 42. Bf6! also wins a piece though! LTJ |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 14 OF 15 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
