You supplied absolutely ZERO analysis. I would rather you had analyzed, and posted this game:
https://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=193014004
Well-Analyzed Game by Fritz 16 - Sicilian Paulsen Opening
Sort:
Apr 25, 2018
0
#3
FishEyedFools wrote:
That game, to be honest, I had no clue what opening he tried to use. I only knew Sicilian so far so I lost my interest of playing as soon as his 2nd move. if I know something, I will try my best, such as in the game I posted
You supplied absolutely ZERO analysis. I would rather you had analyzed, and posted this game:
Although Sicilian is a good opening to study against, I would recommend learning how to defend against other popular openings such as the Queen's Gambit that I used. If you play more matches, you'll definitely run into it again. Generally, you don't want to use Marshall defense but reply with a Slav defense or Queen's Gambit Declined (2... e6), as they tend to be more solid.
Apr 25, 2018
0
#5
Jonny_Shi wrote:
Thanks for your kind suggestion.But I just learned for 2,3 weeks, starting off as a way to improve my brain function. I enjoy playing with engines more than with online players. I am kind of a self-taught person, so I want to progress at my own pace. Playing with other players, I have to learn a lot of openings and adapt to all kind of things. Until I can thoroughly understand the pawn structure, I will not learn a new opening. Playing with chess raise only one concern: is it how a normal player response or only engine play that way.
Although Sicilian is a good opening to study against, I would recommend learning how to defend against other popular openings such as the Queen's Gambit that I used. If you play more matches, you'll definitely run into it again. Generally, you don't want to use Marshall defense but reply with a Slav defense or Queen's Gambit Declined (2... e6), as they tend to be more solid.
Hello folks.
I always want to have a better way to learn chess with engine because unfortunately, there is no chess club in my small town.
So, I purchase Fritz 16 as it is advertised to helps me learn chess, which I agree. I also purchase Houdini 6 because Komodo 9 and Stockfish is free. $100ish investment in chess is worth it because I love chess and I respect chess.
So, I played this game with Club Player Fritz and had a good time because I felt like I did not make any blunders. My opponent resigned after 40th move. I ran Shoutout with 4 engines mentioned above at ply 15 to pick out 2 engines that fit my style and some what similar to what I played. Then, I ran another Shoutout with these 2 engines at ply 21 to see which one handles the best in this game. So, Stockfish won.
Then, I ran full analysis on my game with Stockfish and like I expected, there is room for improvement but I did not make any blunder. Then, I ran another blunder check at ply 7 to see if there is anything I missed. The reason for 7ply is I the max moves I can visualize in my mind is about 3-4 moves so what is the point of choosing 21ply.
From what I have observed, full analysis tries to match my gameplay but points out thing that I can change for a better game, whereas blunder check shows me WHAT IT THINKS IS THE BEST. Then, I deleted any variation in the openings or things that does not fit into my game. I want to improve my game at my own pace and style, not to learn another game from another perspective. So, here is the result. I leave room for comment and annotation because I wish to hear from you guys.