13385 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!
the computer didnt make a "mistake"..
the evaltuation is wrong but its not making any "mistakes" in its moves.
by displaying the plus score the computer just want to tell, you are escaping a big loose with two pawns behind coz you have got odd bishop lucky loser.
What r u saying about?
What am I talking about or what am I saying? Read my post if you want to know.
Which means the machine would happily jump at the chance to reach this position, possibly bypassing other dicisive lines.
u r riduculous
Nope. Your language proficiency is ridiculous. And that's why you didn't understand what I wrote. translate.google.com
ur language skill is ridiculous,Don't argue.u should know how to speakhow to express ur feelings .Don't mumble like child.
Any serious correspondence player (and ALL of them currently are engine users) never, ever takes the engines evaluations in the endgame seriously. You just need your brains there, and proper usage of the fundamental endgame techniques. Engines suck bigtime at endgames, the fault being naturally their coding.
Exactly. I remember one (high rated) votechess player advocating a very dubious, counterintuitive endgame move that no human player would give. As I checked later, it was the highest rated move.
Ummm, I was talking about official correspondence (ICCF, LSS) where engine usage is allowed, not at chess.com.
But I do get your point.
Regarding the OP, any engine able to use tablebases would instantly say it's a draw. But using their own "brains", they just count material and see a win for white, even if they just aimlessly move pieces back and forth.
Oh, yeah. You are right, I somehow didn't see you are talking about correspondence. Thought you mean that in general any serious player has engine for analysis after the game. I should've read more carefuly.
You are obviously right in all aspects. Also, off-topic, I'm sad that I wasn't born in pre-engine times - correspondence games were so much more interesting.
Yes indeed, they were- severely flawed probably, but nevertheless interesting.
Currently one either has to catch the opponent in a prepared opening, or reach a "playable" endgame and there let their engine lose the game for them. Personally I'm a lazy guy to prepare openings, I definitely prefer the second method, and so far I have no reasons to complain- the method just works.
Engines suck bigtime at endgames, the fault being naturally their coding.
yes, i agree with u, engines r positionally dumb.There r several positions i've found that they judge these wrongly.
Which is better Stockfish or Critter?
by InoYamanaka a few minutes ago
Tactics Trainer problems
How to Deactivate Post Note
by Congruity a few minutes ago
Concerned about trolling, again
by Master_Valek 3 minutes ago
My first Legal's mate!
by Master_Valek 4 minutes ago
FM Borislav Ivanov Disqualified
by reflectivist 5 minutes ago
by paulby 6 minutes ago
5/22/2013 - Good Night to the Enemy
by L3r0y 8 minutes ago
Question about the Novag Citrine Chess Computer
by InoYamanaka 8 minutes ago
Whenever I find a match it never opens the game?
by alexownage6 8 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com