15291 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!
Having joined chess.com not long ago, I am trying to improve my (rather weak) play, partly by using the online computer analysis tool of this site. I always try to understand WHY it claims a certain move is either a blunder or a so called mistake, but am really struggling to make any sense of this particular suggestion.
At move 23 in this game, I move Bc5, in order to save it, yet am told that Bxf7+ was much better.
As far as I can tell, it will not accomplish anything other than trading my bishop for a pawn (that was pinned). I have looked it over several times now, and simply fail to spot why my move was a mistake. EDIT: The computer suggest that black will play Kh8 following the move Bxf7+, which seems rather silly to me. Why not just capture one of my bishops?
Though I know I am still fairly clueless compared to the average user of this site, it has caused me to question the value and credibility of the online computer analysis.
I hope someone more experienced can show me why am I wrong, and why Bxf7+ is a much better move. Basically I am asking help to restore my faith in the analysis tool.
Below is the game in question. I tried setting the board up at the exact point of interest, but copy pasting the FEN-string gave me nothing of use.
Thank you in advance for any input, and this being my first post, I hope I haven't violeted any rules (I read the sticky...)
Bxf7+ leads to mate in 8. Kg8-h8 Nc3xb5 Rb8xf8 Qc2-c3+ Kh8-h7 Rd1xd7 Qf4-d4 Nb5xd4 Rf8xf7 Rd7xf7+
Yes, I did use an engine to find this...
23.Bxf7 ?? Not a move I'd play myself but then a certain amount of computer analysis is incomprehensible to me!
One thing I did see: 31.Re7# would have saved you a few moves
Nice win on your part! Congratulations!
It is great that you are analyzing your games. That to me is the absolute best way to improve without a doubt. Even if you hired a chess coach the first thing they are going to want to see is some of your recent games. Just so that they can get an idea of where you are in your thought processes. And then they can work on improving those.
If you don't have access to a chess engine check the forums here and I'm sure someone can point you in the right direction on installing a free strong chess engine such as Crafty into a GUI (Graphical User Interface) such as Arena. Or just Google Crafty and Arena and read through their forums and FAQ sections.
What I do is analyze all of my completed games move by move. Looking for improvements. I go through trying to see if I made any tactical errors or if my opponent played a bad move and I didn't capitalize on it. If I don't understand the reasoning behind the computer recommendation then I will enter into the computer's suggested line (as a variation) to try and get a better understanding. I look for deviations/fluctuations in the engine's assessment of the positions. I'm not worried about a (0.10) 1/10th here or there. I'm looking for 1.00 or greater as this means there is probably a material gain (or loss) of a pawn in most cases.
Do this for your entire game move by move, looking for tactical improvements and your play will improve steadily.
Hope this helps!
Thank you, all of you, for your input.
It seems I missed the discoverd attack on blacks bishop with the Bxf7+ move. Quite embarrassing considering the amount of time I spend looking at that position... Hopefully you guys have helped me improve :)
Can someone explain the "score" after each move in the computer analysis tool? The one that goes 0.12 -> 0.45 -> 0.34 etc. I am guessing it is an evalutation of strength/advantage, but how exactly should it be read? And are there any particular things to look out for? Since the computer only points out mistakes and blunders and not good or strong moves (at least I hope so, or I haven't made a single strong move yet...) I guess a good indicator would be a significant increase/decrease of this score?
Is postive always white, or always me?
Once again thank you for helping out a rookie.
A positive score means White has a better position, negative means Black does. +1.00 means White is better by about one pawn. You have to take those numbers with a grain of salt, though. Especially if you're getting them from the chess.com analysis.
the +.04 per say refers to how many pawns or points (as in material) the computer deems white is playing up or down. so if it was +1 white is better by one point of material or one pawn and if it's -1 then black is better by a pawn
what percentage of professional chess players are poor?
by eehc a few minutes ago
Alleged FIDE deadline for Carlsen
by WillieMays24 a few minutes ago
8/27/2014 - The Middle And Final Resting Place
by Minecraftmania101438 4 minutes ago
dating for chess players?
by The_Ghostess_Lola 4 minutes ago
Mastery of The Finishing S***.
by bangalore2 15 minutes ago
What about taking away victories of closed accounts
by Kostasrallis 17 minutes ago
Why do we want to learn so many openings......?
by alfil72 21 minutes ago
Time for Chess.com to sort out 960 Tournaments !
by pbeckett 24 minutes ago
ADMIN -- Someone deleted the "Egalitarian Troll Society"
by EscherehcsE 25 minutes ago
Glitch - group disabled
by InDetention 26 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 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!