For a computer there is no such thing as good move. There is only bad move and natural move
Computer analysis lowers my self esteem
Sort:
Jadulla wrote:
For a computer there is no such thing as good move. There is only bad move and natural move
Then maybe the computer should give (!) for natural moves, and nothing for bad moves? That way we can still distinguish between the two, while feeling a lot better about ourselves.
macer75 wrote:
Jadulla wrote:
For a computer there is no such thing as good move. There is only bad move and natural move
Then maybe the computer should give (!) for natural moves, and nothing for bad moves? That way we can still distinguish between the two, while feeling a lot better about ourselves.
We make a lot of good moves, still without them being especially good. "1. e4! c5!!". Also imagine the best move being a tactic / sequence of moves. That would give a lot of exclamation marks. What I'm trying to say, how do one distinguish between a good move or natural move?
And btw, a game of Magnus Carlsen would look like a mess
INstead of getting bent out of shape, perhaps you should try and learn from what it is saying.
The nice thing about computer analysis is it only talks to you when you ask it to.
Fiveofswords wrote:
im unemployed, recently dumped, uninvited to my family xmas, my friends try to coach me on having a better imagination on doing interesting things where i might find a moment of distraction from the crushing weight of weltzschmerz. Really sorry about your computer.
Sorry to hear that! My post was a little tongue in cheek. I hope things take a turn for the better for you.
While I'm all about improving my game, I think the idea of "perfect chess" can be disheartening. I guess that's all I'm saying.
Child_Krishna wrote:
Always pointing out my inaccuracies, mistakes and blunders and never giving me a "!" when I make a nice move! I just wish the computer would give me a little positive feedback, you know??????? Just because my game is 42% blunders doesn't mean you have to be so critical, Mr. Computer
Have you tried the tactics trainer?
Child_Krishna wrote:
While I'm all about improving my game, I think the idea of "perfect chess" can be disheartening. I guess that's all I'm saying.
I don't think you have to worry about 'perfect chess' happening any time soon if ever.
The nature of chess makes it pretty difficult if not impossible to create something that could be called a 'perfect' game.
The complexities of positions, numbers of variations and the '6 of 1, 1/2 a dozen of another' factor that often comes up in chess games means a 'perfect' game can probably never happen.
Zigwurst wrote:
Then don't look at it, as you shouldn't be using it anyway.
WHy not?
Using computer analysis as part of an overall plan for improvement can be invaluable.
I've been using computer analysis as a part of my study for almost a year now and it has really helped me identify common mistakes and weaknesses in my play as well as given me new ideas in piece usage.
Always pointing out my inaccuracies, mistakes and blunders and never giving me a "!" when I make a nice move! I just wish the computer would give me a little positive feedback, you know??????? Just because my game is 42% blunders doesn't mean you have to be so critical, Mr. Computer