15419 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
I could not get this thing to format correctly in this editor and so I am posting a link to a pdf file. Hope to get some feedback.
"The traditional "quick and dirty" evaluation function rewards pieces for sitting on squares. This works because a piece's position on the board "generally" translates into an offensive, defensive, and collaborative ability. Any beginner will tell you that he (or she) would rather have a knight prominently placed in the center of the board rather than on the back rank, unmoved. He or she may not be able to calculate what the piece can do 4 or 5 moves into the future, but generally a piece is better in the center than on the edge. But this type of "evaluation" eventually breaks down. There are many cases where a piece may need to temporarily sit on the edge of the board in order to accomplish an objective. Our search process may miss the opportunity to find this move sequence because our evaluation function penalizes the unfavorable location of the piece on the board."
A brilliant observation. Thank you. In my method the human user does the" look ahead" and we compare evaluations not move by move but three half moves apart so some of the attack and mobility issues are addressed though not entirely.
i think what it boils down to is that you may use all resources in online games except two - (1) computer generated moves and (2) advice from another person; but the beauty of it is that given the other resources we don't need the forbidden ones.
An alternate position evaluation method is posted at chessbin.com
Postscript: In the text I ask the reader to look at only one expected reply to each candidate move fearing that an overload of computation will discourage people from trying this method but I myself use at two lines for the reply and discard the weaker one. this is what I would recommend.
you are right khun poompat. the correspondence format makes it possible for average players to play good chess. thank you for all the good information you have provided.
Actually, there is a way to "use engines to help you" in online game legally. I have been doing that and think everyone should also, to improve their games and enjoy chess.
I use Fritz [other engines give inhuman lines!!] to go through some opening books that I like, and keep records (in cbh database format) of each book. In other words, engines are helping to:-
- check the authors' suggested lines. [many are wrong!]
- give improvements / alternate lines of play [even if a bit worse than suggested in books, but sometimes easier for me and/or I like it!]
- Test some dubious lines that I like [most have one/two "refutations" that lead to losing positions but they are not likely obvious to human in OTB games]
I have databases created from my books on Morra Gambit, French Advanced, CaroKann Advance, 4Knights, Danish Gambit, Halloween Gambit [!] (as White), and Accelerated Dragon, Tango (as Black). Referring to these "pre-analyzed" lines is the same as opening opening books by a GM/IM, and is clearly not considerred "cheating" in online games. [but in live games, they are illegal!]
You know, I must have bought 300+ chess books [not that many; one of my friends has 1000+!!], but -like most chessnuts, never read most of them. But now, playing in Chess.com indeed forces me to do my homework by "reading books" and to be able to apply those book lines in games. Of course, I am too old to remember all those lines + variations for use in OTB games [well, there was 1 game that I won OTB in Thailand Open 2011 against 2100+ player, that went 20+ moves exactly same as one of my Chess.com games in 2010!!!].
That's how I think online games (correspondence) improve our games and put back the fun into the game, esp. as one gets older.
Claus Jensen's Najdorf killer: 6. h3
by Jamalov 2 months ago
Samut Sakhon, Thailand
by Jamalov 4 months ago
by Jamalov 5 months ago
A two dimensional measure of chess performance
by Jamalov 6 months ago
The Elo rating system is seriously flawed
by Jamalov 7 months ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!