epic ending!
How to 'decipher' Fritz comments
Sort:
If that's not sarcasim, I will say thank you. I played white in this game.
kleelof wrote:
The result was a bit disappointing. I received back comments that really do nothing to help understand my mistakes.
I'm just curious how I can use comments like this to help me when they don't explain what 'back in the game' is supposed to mean or what the intended 'goal' is in a move.
Welcome to the drawbacks of today's software and chess engines.
Although the top engines are super strong, even stronger than today's GMs, the engines (and the GUIs) are still very poor at telling you exactly WHY a move is good or bad.
This is why books and articles (and a real chess coach) are still valuable. A well-written article about a particular grandmaster, that describes the moves and the reasons behind them, can be better than a chess engine's analysis of that same game.
Thanks for that MEC.
I've had a few more games analyzed and I realized I was just being lazy. Once I took a closer look and followed some of the suggested lines, some of the fog cleared and I found that I can often get the idea behind some of the comments.
Fritz also has the option to put comments in human language when analyzing. I find this option very usefull because like you, what is easy for Fritz, isn't easy for me to see. Not at all.
For the love of God, don't like the computer try to talk.
Case in point: 13. Rxd4?? "Strolling merrily along the path of disaster" 13...Qc7 (13...Qxd4 and the rest is a matter of technique.)
The computer can't talk, it can give something like this: 13. Rxd4?? Qc7?? (13...Qxd4 14. cxd4 Rxc1+ 15. Qf1 Rxf1+ 16. Kxf1 Kd7 with a number somewhere around negative 3).
Both are missed tactics that do not require a verbal explination.
Aggressivesociopath - Perhaps someone with more experience can see that. But for someone who has just begun studying and analyzing their games, it is not so easy to see this.
My point has nothing to do with chess content; my point is that the computer does not know how to talk. Did Black "decide" in any meaningful sense of the word to overlook that White could not recapture on d4 if he played 9...cxd4? If you don't understand the lines the computer is giving you, the verbal comments will not help. The computer never told you that these tactics are based on White's weak back rank and undevolped queenside.
Hello,
I hope this is the correct forum for this.
A friend of mine uses Fritz and I asked him to run a couple of my games through its analaysis so I could determine if I want to invest in the software.
The result was a bit disappointing. I received back comments that really do nothing to help understand my mistakes.
Here is the game:
ex; move 9 the comment is 'Not a good move, now the opponent is right back in the game'. And move 11, there is an alternate line and the computer says 'and black has reached his goal'.
I'm not asking for analaysis comments (but will be happy to accept any helpful comments).
I'm just curious how I can use comments like this to help me when they don't explain what 'back in the game' is supposed to mean or what the intended 'goal' is in a move.