Forums

Computer Analysis is CR*P!!!

Sort:
LadyMisil

The following game:

http://www.chess.com/home/computer_analysis?id=60941250&game_type=1

The computer says my opponent made 5 mistakes, no blunders and no inaccuracies. Accordingly, I made twice as many mistakes (10), along with two blunders (!), and 5 inaccuracies. I won easily.

Chess.com's computer only understands tactical skirmishes. It knows nothing of positional play. It is like it will go through a complicated mate in ten than play a simple resign in one move.

Is this the same computer that we can play with? I would like to play against it some day to find out just how bad it is.

 

Summarizing: Chess.com's computer analysis = cr*p!

AndyClifton

Apparently you know nothing of tactical skirmishes...

LadyMisil

Why risk a won positional game with a tactical skirmish? Why give your opponent counterplay? Apparently you know nothing about basic positional chess.

AndyClifton

Yeah right, I guess that explains my USCF rating, Cheryl. Smile

GI2010

We haven't access to this link [even if I am your friend :) ]. It's your property. I,too, have a bad opinion of computer analysis.

LadyMisil

Hi, GI! Here's the link to the game without computer analysis:

http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=60941250

LadyMisil

Hmmmm ... Andy, you have a 2175 rating, you stick up for chess computers, hmmm ... Yes, I guess that would explain it!

AndyClifton

Without seeing the comp's analysis, there's not much we can say.

AndyClifton
LadyMisil wrote:

Hmmmm ... You have a 2175 rating, you stick up for chess computers, hmmm ... Yes, I guess that would explain it!

lol...no, I was referring to my USCF rating (which you can find on my home page).  Keep on taking your potshots though, Cheryl, I understand you're quite the little archer. Smile

LadyMisil

Oh, check MY profile. I have a USCF rating of 4580. I guess that makes me twice as good as you! Haha!

LadyMisil

And Andy, do you honestly believe risking an easy crushing win by taking risks is good?? Do you also eschew simplifying into book wins?

LadyMisil

Finally, for a USCF expert, have you never heard of the positional strategy of walking your king. It is apparent most computers do not. Like a computer, do you not also? Read Nimzovich.

LadyMisil

Andy, you can submit the game for computer analysis yourself. No more excuses!

GI2010

I looked at the game and I concluded it was a little strange.
Computer was also (probably) surprised. :)

LadyMisil
[COMMENT DELETED]
C-nack
LadyMisil wrote:

Andy, you can submit the game for computer analysis yourself. No more excuses!

No, we can't, only you can submit your games for computer analysis.

Download PGN in computer analysis and post here.

And Andy is a National Master, so I guess that doesn't make you twice as good.

LadyMisil

I have an iPad, no computer. I cannot download as you say. Go to my games and download it yourself. It is my recent game with Sparky.

So you know this Andy personally? Are you also a National Master? Or a school friend that uses chess engines and sticks up for his friends in crime? Why should I believe you? Just because you write something in cyberspace??

LadyMisil

Hmmm ... GI, you can view the game but Andy and his friend claim they cannot ... sounds like someone is not really trying to view the game at all. Thank you for letting me know that the game is viewable, GI!

GI2010

The link :

http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=60941250

is ok.

PGN :

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.Nc3 f6 6.O-O Bd6 7.d4 exd4 8.Nxd4 Ne7 9.Be3 Ng6 10.f4 O-O 11.f5 Ne5 12.Qh5 Nc4 13.Nd1 Nxe3 14.Nxe3 Bc5 15.Rad1 Bxd4 16.Kh1 Qd6 17.c3 Bxe3 18.Rxd6 cxd6 19.Rf3 Bc1 20.g4 Bd7 21.b3 Rad8 22.c4 Be8 23.Qh4 Rf7 24.Qe1 Bb2 25.Qd2 Be5 26.g5 fxg5 27.Qxg5 Bf6 28.Qg4 Re7 29.Qf4 c5 30.Re3 Bc6 31.Kg2 Re5 32.Kf1 h6 33.h4 Kf7 34.a4 a5 35.Re2 b6 36.Kf2 Ke7 37.h5 Kd7 38.Qg4 Kc7 39.Kf1 Rde8 40.Qg6 R8e7 41.Qg4 Bxe4

LadyMisil

Thanks, GI. I tried another way to put the PGN file here, but the best I could do was get it into my documents. From my documents to here, it turns into the same link as above.