Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Surprising results between titled players: lost half points

  • FM NFork
  • | Mar 20, 2014
  • | 3773 views
  • | 13 comments

If someone knows surprising results of chess games I would be interested to read. Here are some of them from Finnish championship tournament that was played last year 10th-18th June. To just keep the article shorter I mostly just added Houdini 3 evaluations of best moves and mistakes that were done.

Is there luck in chess? Or is "luck" actually skills?

Results after 9 rounds:

1. IM Mika Karttunen (2450) 7½/9

2. IM Vilka Sipilä (2390) 7

3. FM Daniel Ebeling (2417) 6½

Comments


  • 9 months ago

    Dekker

    Well, for me this article feels a bit strange, because it seems we're only given positions, with the text moves, the best alternative from Houdini, and their respective evaluations. Okay, they are suprising, but for example in your game against Sipilä, why is Qh4 threatening a perpetual? 
    It gets interesting to show why the Houdini-evaluations are inferior to the moves played in the game, but we don't seem to get to that point. Therefore, for now I cannot see how I can learn from this article. Perhaps you could give less examples, but more worked out examples of games. 

  • 9 months ago

    FM NFork

    Heh Houdini evaluations are not everything but still we talk only about engines - feels bit strange.

  • 9 months ago

    FM chesskingdreamer

    i belive a houdini eval of 2 bishops of the same color vs lone king is about +6...

  • 9 months ago

    LarEe91

    Patzers keep patzing Wink

  • 9 months ago

    rajnikant001

    thank you,NFork , i try your method on my games to know about my playing style :)

  • 9 months ago

    FM NFork

    You can check very fastly with engine where you opponent has done mistakes on different games and keep track on the patterns. If he does lot of mistakes on dry positions then maybe positional play is not his strength. Or if he does mistakes whenever he moves pawns then probably he doesn't understand pawn dynamics.

    Well maybe I should write another article and this time about engines because talk about them a lot in here :)

    Should there be the whole games with moves and usable boards when it comes to these championship games?

  • 9 months ago

    rajnikant001

    FM NFork,

    thank you for explaining the difference between engine's evaluation in middlegame and endgame. unfortunately, i was not aware of it.

    by the way, i was just wondering how would one study the players style with the help of engine ? 

  • 9 months ago

    FM NFork

    For rajnikant001 and maybe for others:

    Yes engine evaluations are not everything, but in here I used them mainly to fasten up writing this article. For me engine is very good tool on different areas in chess. For example I am able to study the playing style of players very fastly using engine. It would take longer to do the job without it.

    We also have to interpret what engine evaluation actually means. On middlegame +1 means about winning game, but on endgame +1 very often doesn't mean the same. If both players have bishop but other one 1 pawn more it may show +1. If it would be for example +6 then it's clearly a easy win because it could mean white gets queen vs bishop endgame. On endgames there are lot of cases +1 only means that white is 1 pawn up and nothing more.

  • 9 months ago

    hicetnunc

    Humans make mistake.

    Having your opponent make a mistake is some kind of luck.

    Putting your opponent under pressure to increase the odds of him making a mistake is skill Smile

  • 9 months ago

    rajnikant001

    modern engines are not able to correctly analyse the theoritically drawn endgame. even a dead drawn position of  opposite coloured bishop endgame are not given a score of 0.00 , they are usually given a score of +1 or -1 . seems like engines are good only in middle games. while analysing endgame, humans are much better than engines :)

  • 9 months ago

    unusualkid

    Computers are to materialistic, maybe in one of the variations the computer is missing a game winning or game saving positional sacrifice or pawn sac for perpetual

  • 9 months ago

    Milad_Avazbeigi

    If Houdini were supposed to keep playing, I am pretty sure it would make sense to talk about +1 or -1. We are talking about humans not computers. It is almost impossible that a human precisely follows the line analyzed by a powerful engine such as Houdini that analyses millions of lines in seconds!!! Most of the end games for example are very sensetive positions that a single wrong move can chane a +1 to a -1. Just take a look at Aronian and Kramnik games and how they blew >1s! These are world chess elites...!

  • 9 months ago

    Roeczak

    Houdini evluations aren't everything...

Back to Top

Post your reply: