Do a lot of people use the analysis board? I mean, during the game, not after....Just for my curiosity?
Hope chess
Sort:
"Hope Chess - You don't consistently see if your candidate moves can be defeated by a forcing reply before you make your move ..."
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627071059/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman111.pdf
https://www.chess.com/article/view/passive-vs-basic-hope-chess
Jun 11, 2018
0
#4
Ks: interesting.
bw: I am using it at the moment, but will try to use it less in the future. Got horrible calculation skills.
Yes it'll be frustrating if you are playing against a weaker opponent. But don't forget that it'll be very helpful against stronger opponents!
There's no "hope". Chess is not a game of luck. Simple as that.
Jun 11, 2018
0
#7
Blunderpatzer wrote:
I have often heard the advice not to play hope chess. That is, I should always assume that my opponent plays the best possible moves.
Sort of that's what it means.
The focus is more on you than your opponent though. Not playing hope chess means you are making sure you calculate your opponent's threatening replies.
Blunderpatzer wrote:
Then, a day later, my opponent responds with a bad move I had not considered at all. This is good, since I will probably win the game but also frustrating since all my hard work went down the drain.
Yeah, that happens.
Even more frustrating is when an opponent consistently makes small inaccuracies. So you waste a lot of effort and your opponent is never quite losing 
But there are definitely there are ways to be more efficient. For example you don't need to look 5 or 10 move ahead (unless there are forcing moves). If the goal is to break down a fortress you merely have to ask 1) does my plan make sense and 2) are there any tactics that refute it. Then play your move.
If you have to resort to long calculation to answer question #1 then it's your lack of experience and knowledge weighing you down (and that happens to all of us).
breakingbad12 wrote:
There's no "hope". Chess is not a game of luck. Simple as that.
The rules of chess describe a game with no luck, but when humans play it there is some small amount of luck involved.
The easiest example is pairing programs simulate a coin toss before the first pairings to decide certain things... but also during the game itself, what you happen to calculate, what risks you're willing to take, these sorts of things.
^ Uhh, yes. Of course that, as humans, some luck is always involved, but not to the point of intentionally making bad moves and hoping for the best.
By the way, I'm going to unfollow this thread since it's not useful anymore, so please don't reply to my comment.
Jun 11, 2018
0
#10
The following isn't about luck or hope, but as for intentionally making bad moves, this happens a lot in top level games.
Not bad in the sense that they're losing, but bad in the sense that you make the position harder for yourself... but if a draw is less likely, you're also increasing your winning chances (well, as long as you choose your sub-par moves wisely that is).
This is how Caruana beat Anand in Norway a few days ago (another Petroff win!). His move 13 is obviously not great, but he chose the moving understanding that.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1921230
I have often heard the advice not to play hope chess. That is, I should always assume that my opponent plays the best possible moves.
Now lately, in a daily game, I used at least half an hour on a move, since I could not figure out a way to break the defenses of my opponent even though I used the analysis board a lot and calculated countless combinations. Then, a day later, my opponent responds with a bad move I had not considered at all. This is good, since I will probably win the game but also frustrating since all my hard work went down the drain.