Only he who attempts the absurd is capable of achieving the impossible.
Simple Endgame Position
Sort:
HueyWilliams wrote:
wilford-n wrote:
All checked with Stockfish 6.0.
Gosh, there's a surprise!
It's been a month and I contemplated not bothering to respond at all, but every time I get a notification on this thread, I see it again. So I have to ask, what was your point? It sounds like a thinly veiled engine-cheating accusation, which is ridiculous on its surface... especially considering that (1) my rating is only in the 1500-1600 range, (2) I have no game history with you from which to draw such assumptions, and (3) I haven't had any memorable forum encounters that might lead to your unfounded animosity.
But on to the point...
I spotted better White moves specifically at 7, 10, and 13 and highlighted those moves. Since even GMs miss things in analysis, I checked those moves with an engine. (News flash, genius: almost every chess book published today is checked with an engine, and almost every chess book published in the era before engines has a number of corrections found because of them.)
Sorry for changing the subject back to that of the OP. I'm unfollowing this thread, so feel free to return to your witless trolling and lexical pretentions. (You know, the "real subject" you so skillfully "honed in on.")
Mar 13, 2016
0
#45
wilford-n wrote:
HueyWilliams wrote:
wilford-n wrote:
All checked with Stockfish 6.0.
Gosh, there's a surprise!
It's been a month and I contemplated not bothering to respond at all, but every time I get a notification on this thread, I see it again. So I have to ask, what was your point? It sounds like a thinly veiled engine-cheating accusation
Umm, obviously it's because no one would bother doing such accurate analysis on their own. Especially someone with a low rating who very likely wouldn't be able to do it on their own in the first place.
That, and it's basically understood everyone checks their analysis with an engine so they don't post something really stupid.
"Especially someone with a low rating who very likely wouldn't be able to do it on their own in the first place."
I forgot to unfollow. But this comment is both false and insulting. Everything in the paragraph following move 13 (which the OP gave a "!!" but deserves a "??") is my own, for example. And as I stated, White's better alternatives at 7 and 10 were easily spotted, too.
I suppose I should have sent that as a PM, so that the more arrogant and egotistical segment of the forum population (16xx might be kind of low, but 18xx isn't really that much better) wouldn't think so highly of themselves as to be able to answer on behalf of the OTHER PERSON to whom the post was addressed.
Mar 13, 2016
0
#47
wilford-n wrote:
"Especially someone with a low rating who very likely wouldn't be able to do it on their own in the first place."
I forgot to unfollow. But this comment is both false and insulting. Everything in the paragraph following move 13 (which the OP gave a "!!" but deserves a "??") is my own, for example. And as I stated, White's better alternatives at 7 and 10 were easily spotted, too.
I suppose I should have sent that as a PM, so that the more arrogant and egotistical segment of the forum population (16xx might be kind of low, but 18xx isn't really that much better) wouldn't think so highly of themselves as to be able to answer on behalf of the OTHER PERSON to whom the post was addressed.
I'm talking about the "four moves faster" , "two moves faster" parts. That's unnecessary accuracy. I haven't looked at the position in detail, but in almost any position that would be a lot of work for me too. So it's not that you're 16xx, it's that you're not 22xx.
If you want to compare ratings, just for the record, 1000 blitz to 1800 blitz is quite a big difference 
1000 to 1800 is a big difference, I'll grant you that, but blitz isn't chess; often it's just about memorizing some trappy lines in some obscure and inferior openings. I almost never play blitz. Most of my blitz games here are at least three years old. In any case, when it comes to analysis, blitz rating isn't very applicable. Apples and oranges, my friend.
Yeah, that level of detail was obviously engine-powered... but when the position is posed as a problem for the user to solve, isn't best play (at least by the solver) the goal? My point with that litany of improvements was to illustrate ad absurdum the fact that most of White's moves are inferior.
As for "not 22xx," nothing about edwardseungwonjeong's position requires that much depth of understanding. 7.Nf7 is a move a patzer could spot: the bishop is trapped; Black's only legal move is a king move that abandons it to its fate. If the position after Black's 6th was a tactical problem on chesstempo, I'd be surprised if its rating was even 1200.
Same can be said for 13.h6? gxh6 forcing a draw in the given line.
Sorry about the "arrogant/egotistical" dig. The internet brings out the pit bull in the best of us... and have no problem admitting I am far from the best.
Mar 31, 2016
0
#53
Read my other forums too-
Mating Motifs- Arabian Mate , Anastasia's Mate .
Endgame- Geometry of the Board .
My Games- My win against a titled player(CM) .
Openings- Gambits , Gambits-Game 1 .
k
Apr 4, 2016
0
#55
In particular, you should see what you can learn from his thread on Boden's Mate.
hmmm