+Mat06 does that notation in computer analysis mean forced mate in 6?
Chess.com free computer analysis - not good enough
Sort:
chessmagic5 wrote:
erik wrote:
you are spot on - the free analysis isn't good enough for serious players. it analyzes at a depth of 8, which isn't very good at all, especially for positional play. but what it does is expose newer players to tactical problems and shows people how computer analysis will work so that they will subscribe to the full features of game analysis ;)
That explains it. Fair enough.
I dont know but I still feel that the strength should be more prudent to include advanced players. In this way you will make chess.com gain more loyal advanced players. The more advanced players you have, the more chess.com becomes stronger as a chess website (than competitors) because you will have more quality games to offer as a site.
Here in Australia, to attract more participants in chess tournaments we dont let titled players pay for the entrance fee. In this way, more titled strong players will likely to play thus making the tournament as a strong tournament. Strong tournaments attract more paying participants because they want to have the chance to play the titled players.
In parallel, improving the strength of your free computer analysis the more attraction you will get from new and loyal strong members. It will also increase the quality games played and learnings in chess.com thus attracting more appeal to the site.
All I'm just suggesting is a little more strength in the free analysis.
I have Fritz 7 and 11 chess engines. I think you are getting my drift...
It's just a suggestion... and I could be asking too much.
Thank you, I remain.
Dude... If you have Fritz 11, why bother with the chess.com engine?
Nov 3, 2008
0
#24
bondiggity wrote:
I disagree chessmagic5, I doubt that any strong and serious chess player doesn't have their own personal chess engine rated around 3000 elo. Even if chess.com offered 2500 strength analysis (what platinum and diamond members currently receive), strong players would still use their own engine to get better results.
i agree - but our analysis is incredibly convenient and can quickly show you missed tactical opportunities, mates, and blunders very easily :) i see it as a supplement, not a replacement.
Nov 3, 2008
0
#25
is there a program that will explain the ideas in an analysis of a game to the user.
Instead of just saying this string of moves was better. Saying this string of moves was better because....
Nov 3, 2008
0
#26
immortalgamer wrote:
is there a program that will explain the ideas in an analysis of a game to the user.
Instead of just saying this string of moves was better. Saying this string of moves was better because....
It's called Chess coach 1.0
The free analysis is a great psychological tool as well. If you do poorly in a game, and feel like you played badly, sometimes going back through the game you'll see that your position wasn't as bad as you thought. I've had several games now where I felt like my opponent was in-command so strongly that I believed they could be using an engine to make their moves, but the analysis showed that they made poor moves and even blundered at times. It gives you a great feeling to know that you're "right-there" if you just buckle down and think about your moves a little more.
The analysis is crap even at 2200. See this position? Riiiightttttt...
Nov 3, 2008
0
#30
You can download crafty 22.1 for free, and just run your own analysis using the annotate (or annotateh or annotatet) commands.
By the way, how do you approximate Crafty's rating by adjusting the ply that Crafty searches at? Is this just a common approximation of playing strength that I'm not aware of, or is there a formula or table somewhere? I'd be interested what rating a deeper ply search could reach. 
Kingfisher: it looks like it stopped exactly 10 moves after that move (gold member, so that makes sense). That's the horizon problem with chess analysis, and that probably arises from the hard limit of 8, 10, or 12 ply searching. Certain conditions (check, capture, king safety) normally extend the depth of the search because of situations like this, but I presume the depth is being strictly limited for the membership levels of analysis.
Even if you get the best chess engine with the most 'human' style of analysis, an engine is never going to give you the kind of insight and instruction a human player can give you after analysing your game(s).
Webhead wrote: Dude... If you have Fritz 11, why bother with the chess.com engine?
Like I wrote previously on top, "On that note I wouldnt mind if a more credible free analysis from chess.com is to be included [besides other engines] in my consideration of moves."
I dunno how to explain it... seems like total BS.
JG27Pyth wrote:
I dunno how to explain it... seems like total BS.
BS? What does it stands for?
Sorry still a noob.
Erik, I think you're doing a fine job with the whole site. Thank you very much, in case no one has thanked you for your hard work.
Hugh_T_Patterson wrote:
Erik, I think you're doing a fine job with the whole site. Thank you very much, in case no one has thanked you for your hard work.
I agree.
Erik, you are doing an excellent job. I thank you very much as well for this excellent site.
But you know how it is in every venture...
Like Kasparov said, "...we shouldn't just sit in our laurels of success or defeats but should always come back to evaluate the positions and see if there are still ways to improve"
Also, from Karpov: "Chess as in life, there is always a room for improvement"
The analysis has been OK for one game, but today the results were ridiculous. In one move for white, the score went from -0.85 to +3.87! Then, at the end of one variant, white is mating in 1 move. The computer's comment? "Black has a slight advantage."
There are a few examples in this particular game where the analysis was actually harmful as a teaching tool. Often very good positional moves (according to Fritz) were classified as mistakes or even blunders.
I don't mean to look a gift horse in the mouth here. Just putting the word to double check the analysis.
I was surprise with the latest analysis I received!
The computer qualified as a mistake a move I made and was showing as a better move a non sense what so ever sacrifice of one rook!
Concerning!
Nov 6, 2008
0
#39
we're working on it. the analysis is done by crafty, and clearly this is a limitation of using fixed-depth computer analysis :) for me it has been helpful as a tool.
so erik what you are saying that if you are a full member you will have your games analyse deeper ?
yes. free members get 1 game per week at depth of 8ply (2000 strength). silver/gold get 2 games per week at 10 ply (2200 strength). platinum/diamond get 25 games per week at 12ply (2500 strength).
What if you're a higher grade than 2200, that's like asking a weaker player to tell you where you could improve?