Forums

modern chess engines have shown us that its infinity out there on 64 squares.

Sort:
cyberdynsystemsmodel
cyberdynsystemsmodel
Jan 8, 2013
0
#21
Scottrf wrote:

Your writing reminds me of this joke:

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~choh/german.htm

lol

waffllemaster
waffllemaster
Jan 8, 2013
0
#22
abdulmajidsayem1 wrote:
waffllemaster wrote:
abdulmajidsayem1 wrote:
pfren wrote:

Ignorance is Bliss.

sir can u elaborate?

Also, it's worth it to note computers play chess exactly how humans have programed them to.  If a knight is better on a certain square, or the king is safer on the queenside, is all determined by the human programmer. 

Tactically the computer is very good.  But in chess understanding it has nothing new to offer.  And often, because it can only follow the program, the "understanding" it does show is wrong.

hmm so y do G.M.S DO COMPUTER ANALYSIS OF GAMES....????

Y IS IT THAT NO ONE CAN BEAT THEM????

its said that chess is 90% tactics so v cant rule out that computers have given rise to new era of chess....


 

Because the computers offer tactically sound alternatives that may be worth exploring (or may not be).  Also it's a cheap and efficent way to get analysis 24/7.  If their country paid to hire GM assistants then this is of course much more useful than having a computer (in terms of chess understanding).

Because the error rate for a human during a game is higher.  Chess analysis is different though, it's not a game.  Your post said the programs have offered a new understand which is a ridiculous statement.

Actually Teichmann said it's 99% tactics, which was tongue in cheek of course... well, for a beginner it's 100% tactics.

Razdomillie
Razdomillie
Jan 8, 2013
0
#23

It's 1:30 AM, 40 degrees and I'm still trying to decipher the title... Is he trying to say that we don't know much about chess, that there's too much to learn, that computers know everything?

Bah I give up, this is just impossible for me now.

abdulmajidsayem1
abdulmajidsayem1
Jan 8, 2013
0
#24
waffllemaster wrote:
abdulmajidsayem1 wrote:
waffllemaster wrote:
abdulmajidsayem1 wrote:
pfren wrote:

Ignorance is Bliss.

sir can u elaborate?

Also, it's worth it to note computers play chess exactly how humans have programed them to.  If a knight is better on a certain square, or the king is safer on the queenside, is all determined by the human programmer. 

Tactically the computer is very good.  But in chess understanding it has nothing new to offer.  And often, because it can only follow the program, the "understanding" it does show is wrong.

hmm so y do G.M.S DO COMPUTER ANALYSIS OF GAMES....????

Y IS IT THAT NO ONE CAN BEAT THEM????

its said that chess is 90% tactics so v cant rule out that computers have given rise to new era of chess....


 

Because the computers offer tactically sound alternatives that may be worth exploring (or may not be).  Also it's a cheap and efficent way to get analysis 24/7.  If their country paid to hire GM assistants then this is of course much more useful than having a computer (in terms of chess understanding).

Because the error rate for a human during a game is higher.  Chess analysis is different though, it's not a game.  Your post said the programs have offered a new understand which is a ridiculous statement.

Actually Teichmann said it's 99% tactics, which was tongue in cheek of course... well, for a beginner it's 100% tactics.


comon buddy......u cant ridicule that statement u may not agree thats a different thing....what i meant by understanding is different from wat u infered from it...........i meant that they have showed us that chess is a board of sixty four squares in which millions of variations are possible.......hope u understoood this tym waqt i meant.:)

abdulmajidsayem1
abdulmajidsayem1
Jan 8, 2013
0
#25
Razdomillie wrote:

It's 1:30 AM, 40 degrees and I'm still trying to decipher the title... Is he trying to say that we don't know much about chess, that there's too much to learn, that computers know everything?

Bah I give up, this is just impossible for me now.

silicon monsters are too much for us...computers know wat v programed them to do its just that they r faster,lack emotions,r fed up wd opening buks,end game tables n much more...so they have an advantage over us...

abdulmajidsayem1
abdulmajidsayem1
Jan 8, 2013
0
#26
ludrah wrote:

Should I laugh about this? Or just be confused?


well 1st 1 will b better

abdulmajidsayem1
abdulmajidsayem1
Jan 8, 2013
0
#27

hmmm den u shd hav mentioned it............

TheGreatOogieBoogie
TheGreatOogieBoogie
Jan 8, 2013
0
#28

About tactics: You need to have a positional understanding to know why certain tactics would be good or not, and to formulate plans when there are no tactics available.  Do you sacrifice the exchange of rook for bishop?  Some positions would call for it because the darksquared bishops would be far more active there than the rooks, especially if the side offering the sacrifice has darksquare weaknesses that his bishop protects. 

abdulmajidsayem1
abdulmajidsayem1
Jan 8, 2013
0
#29
ScorpionPackAttack wrote:

About tactics: You need to have a positional understanding to know why certain tactics would be good or not, and to formulate plans when there are no tactics available.  Do you sacrifice the exchange of rook for bishop?  Some positions would call for it because the darksquared bishops would be far more active there than the rooks, especially if the side offering the sacrifice has darksquare weaknesses that his bishop protects. 

thanks a lot buddy fr such valuable post...can u suggest ways to improve positional understanding??