Chess.com chess analysis: silly?

You're not serious?

I has no idea how to even access what you are talking about, but wouldn't it be a better idea just to work it out for yourself ?

ok, now tell me what the flyin' is a GUI ? Does EVERYbody talk in acronyms nowadays ?

Graphical User Interface - the buttons and windows that let you interact with stuff on your computer.

You could say that one important example between office 2007 and the older versions is the GUI, for example. Most of the buttons are still the same but they are located at different places. That's a changed GUI right there.

What he's saying is that if you submit a game for analysis (which you can do as a platinum member) the resulting computer analysis will be viewable in a game window, and there will be buttons for sidelines. You could also click on the variations in the move list, they are in the window with all the chess notation. (and are coloured red and blue)

I doubt it's completely inane. Post the game with the computer analysis. I want to see the crazy queen sac.

I'm going to post something here for you - I took a screen capture of one of my game analyses and it called my position drawn, with my opponent having a clear mate in one. It's wild to see.

I adore this site and pay to use it but I haven't gotten much out of this specific feature yet, so I sometimes look at it but never too closely (I look to other recommended analysis tools when I can).

This screen cap is on my laptop - if you don't see it within a day or so, message me to remind me and I'll post it.

Here it is (see my comment above). Note that the "drawish position" comment is posted following the site's suggested line of play.

Can you find the EASY mate in one for my opponent? Not quite a drawish position, eh? Again, not a huge deal for me since I use the site so much, but until this kind of thing is fixed I don't see it as a resource I'm confident in using.

 I've had the exact same thing. It said I had a strong advantage yet I was getting mated the next move! The computer analysis can be funny at times.

For a comp analysis, the first move of the variatioon is always proper but it becomes inaccurate as you go deeper. I do not look beyond 2-3 moves for any variation.

Now hold on a second.

Since you're a diamond user the program functions differently for you, (supposedly at a 2500 level, but I don't buy that). Free users are analysing with a dumbed down - some 500 points - computer.

This might make the difference between accurate and absurd.

Though you might have been commenting on the fact that a 1350 rated (turn based) player is making this thread.

That's pretty funny.

But, I guess if this was an important part of why you decided to pay for a membership, it's less funny....

Take a look at the computer's analysis. It's good up to the last move at which point it plays a blunder. From the (two examples) I've seen, the computer blunders happen on the last move of lengthy analysis variations.

Each program has its limitations - On my computer Rybka 3 (not the system used on the Chess.com server which resources are shared between 1001 things) often needs several minutes to reach to a correct conclusion. Sometimes it needs even more to find an awkward winning combination. On Chess.com, your games are analyzed within 10 to 20 minutes. I consistantly see differences between the evaluations of Chess.com and Rybka.

Gonnosuke nailed it.

Here is what I think: you do not need computer analysis at all.

As far as I know it is better to take some of your games and try to understand what happened during the game, and why (good moves, mistakes) by yourself. It is even better if you can talk with your opponent (or somebody else who is skilled at chess). Human brain has human ideas; computer "brain" has no ideas.

Computer analysis will provide you "best lines" based on his parameters: computer counts points for a given position, then calculates several moves ahead and counts again, and then he says which line is "better". But computer do not understand anything about chess (only about numbers) and, probably, so you will not understand what computer is reporting after analysis.

I imagine computer analysis may be useful for very strong players as they may have much deeper understanding and they know how to use computers for analysis. But in the case, I am sure they will use a powerful machine, and not Chess.com computer (a shared one, short analysis time, no parameters to configure...).

The fact that GrandMasters work with computers does not mean that working with computers can make us closer to GrandMasters.

The thing I like about a computer analysis, including the one on Chess.com, is it can sometimes show me where things went wrong.  For instance, I might look at a game and decide it was a bonehead play I made on move 17 that lost it for me.  From the computer analysis, though, I may discover that it was actually my play 2 moves earlier on move 15 that started me down the road of no return.

--Cystem

we are going to have a MUCH better computer analysis coming soon! a new faster, stronger engine ;)

Great!  Do you know yet if it wall be available to all 3 levels of Premium members, or just the Diamond?

the analysis engine is like 1600, not 2500.  You would be much better off to download a good strong free engine (Crafty comes to mind, or maybe Rybka 2, I'm sure there are other excellent free alternatives by now) and let it analyse on your own computer.

Well... besides the last move blunder, which you could just ignore, it did find good moves and did get to a drawish position right?

That it missed the mate in one is funny but the other moves looked good.