openings books or computer moves ?

Sort:
Avatar of AbodySattar
[COMMENT DELETED]
Avatar of Gomoto

That one is easy, allthough you are over 2000 and I am only near 1200 Cool

1. You should not follow opening book or computer moves in the first place.

2. Computer knowledge is not the end of all tales.

Avatar of VLaurenT

What's your USCF rating ?

Avatar of AbodySattar
hicetnunc wrote:

What's your USCF rating ?

why you are asking ?

Avatar of AbodySattar
Gomoto wrote:

That one is easy, allthough you are over 2000 and I am only near 1200

1. You should not follow opening book or computer moves in the first place.

2. Computer knowledge is not the end of all tales.

sorry but i don't get you ! 

on openings lines you must fallow detremined moves .

Avatar of baruchyadid

Post examples

Avatar of Gomoto

You are really interested in the answer to your question. To provide you with a good answer, it is helpfull to know your strength. It is also important to know in which context are you asking this question. (Playing for fun, playing competetive, training, analyzing a game, extending your opening repertoire ...). There is no simple answer to your question.

Avatar of VLaurenT
AbodySattar wrote:
hicetnunc wrote:

What's your USCF rating ?

why you are asking ?

Because obviously I wouldn't give the same answer to someone rated 1200, 1800 or 2300...

Avatar of pt22064

Chess engines are often weak in the openings and usually rely on openings databases to pick their moves rather than calculating the optimal move.  I think for some engines, you can shut off the openings database and force it to calculate, but that might result in the engine choosing strange moves.

The chess.com chess engine for free users (I am not a paid subscriber and can't comment on the chess engine for paid users) is actually very bad.  It identifies certain known openings as "mistakes" or "inaccuracies."  For example, it tells me that c6 (Caro Kann) as a response to e4 is a "mistake."  Similarly, I heard someone complain that the chess engine advised that c5 (Sicilian) in response to e4 is a "mistake."  The chess engine also labels many of my moves in known opening lines as "inaccuracies" when the moves are perfectly fine and lead to playable positions.

In short, don't trust the chess enginer -- at least not chess.com's chess engine.

Avatar of iKent

Gomoto, take your time to think, before you post anything on Chess.com. You're publishing the mark of your own stupidity. 

Avatar of AbodySattar
Gomoto wrote:

You are really interested in the answer to your question. To provide you with a good answer, it is helpfull to know your strength. It is also important to know in which context are you asking this question. (Playing for fun, playing competetive, training, analyzing a game, extending your opening repertoire ...). There is no simple answer to your question.

okay am doing all of this (Playing for fun, playing competetive, training, analyzing a game, extending your opening repertoire ...) and i don'y have a USCF rating my FIDE is 1929 and it's new rating just came in .


Avatar of AbodySattar
hicetnunc wrote:
AbodySattar wrote:
hicetnunc wrote:

What's your USCF rating ?

why you are asking ?

Because obviously I wouldn't give the same answer to someone rated 1200, 1800 or 2300...

my FIDE rating is 1929 :)

Avatar of AbodySattar
pt22064 wrote:

Chess engines are often weak in the openings and usually rely on openings databases to pick their moves rather than calculating the optimal move.  I think for some engines, you can shut off the openings database and force it to calculate, but that might result in the engine choosing strange moves.

The chess.com chess engine for free users (I am not a paid subscriber and can't comment on the chess engine for paid users) is actually very bad.  It identifies certain known openings as "mistakes" or "inaccuracies."  For example, it tells me that c6 (Caro Kann) as a response to e4 is a "mistake."  Similarly, I heard someone complain that the chess engine advised that c5 (Sicilian) in response to e4 is a "mistake."  The chess engine also labels many of my moves in known opening lines as "inaccuracies" when the moves are perfectly fine and lead to playable positions.

In short, don't trust the chess enginer -- at least not chess.com's chess engine.

thanks for your comment i have Komodo 6.0 engine and it's 2967 rating engine , and i cut out the opening database and it's playing unusual moves and piont mistakes in some opening lines known to us as a good lines .

Avatar of Gomoto
iKent wrote:

Gomoto, take your time to think, before you post anything on Chess.com. You're publishing the mark of your own stupidity. 

thank you mark!

Avatar of VLaurenT
AbodySattar wrote:
hicetnunc wrote:
AbodySattar wrote:
hicetnunc wrote:

What's your USCF rating ?

why you are asking ?

Because obviously I wouldn't give the same answer to someone rated 1200, 1800 or 2300...

my FIDE rating is 1929 :)

Well, that's strong enough for you to decide between both options then (book move and engine suggestion) on a case-by-case basis.

Pick the move that you understand better or appeals to you the most.

Avatar of AbodySattar
hicetnunc wrote:
AbodySattar wrote:
hicetnunc wrote:
AbodySattar wrote:
hicetnunc wrote:

What's your USCF rating ?

why you are asking ?

Because obviously I wouldn't give the same answer to someone rated 1200, 1800 or 2300...

my FIDE rating is 1929 :)

Well, that's strong enough for you to decide between both options then (book move and engine suggestion) on a case-by-case basis.

Pick the move that you understand better or appeals to you the most.

i did that many times and the computer keeps getting to a wining positions !! , i will choose the move i know if i were playing a human but am just intersting in the computer choise .

Avatar of Validior

put that computer against an equally strong computer and see what happens. I dont think one comp will get into a "winning" position really quickly in the opening

Im pretty sure the hozizon effect is important in openings....I doubt the computer can really see 99 kabillion possibilities 10 moves deep etc.

 

That being said, comps can obviously be used to check for traps and holes in lines etc but I doubt youd be looking until more like move 12 or so. Its like in those old Tv chess matches called "the Master Game" where the GMs would have played like 10-15 moves and finally they say "we'll Ill have to start calculating now"

Avatar of AbodySattar
gokuvsvegeta wrote:

Computer isn't always right :). An evaluation that is .30 of a pawn should be even but computer thinks around millon of moves per second while we humans play quite differently. What we see as logical computer sees kind of a mistake etc...

will i bet that computer is always right !

Avatar of AbodySattar
Validior wrote:

put that computer against an equally strong computer and see what happens. I dont think one comp will get into a "winning" position really quickly in the opening

Im pretty sure the hozizon effect is important in openings....I doubt the computer can really see 99 kabillion possibilities 10 moves deep etc.

 

That being said, comps can obviously be used to check for traps and holes in lines etc but I doubt youd be looking until more like move 12 or so. Its like in those old Tv chess matches called "the Master Game" where the GMs would have played like 10-15 moves and finally they say "we'll Ill have to start calculating now"

yes they will after 22 to 28 moves the computer without the opening database keeps winnig :\

Avatar of Gomoto

If you think the computer is always right and can prove it, I would be interested in your universal evaluation function.

Ah, you only bet ...

(of course when chess is solved the computer will be always right, but that moment has not arrived yet)