x
Chess - Play & Learn

Chess.com

FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store

VIEW

Put Away your Chess Engine

  • #61
    GodsPawn2016 wrote:
    AboyNamedJohn wrote:
    How i get good? Will an engine help me

    Eat garlic, and cabbage...

     

     

    We can add corned beef, potatoes and carrots, make a delicious meal, might add to your chess strength. Laughing

  • #62

    just noticed something strange about two of my engines. 

     

    I was studying an interesting position reached near the end of an opening line .I was interested in the engine was spitting out its' preferred line. After waiting quite some time for it to settle on its choice, I decided to walk it forward down a line I thought looked promising. Then I backed it up to the position I was examing earlier and it was suggesting a different line than before.

     

    Anyone else ever experience this phenom?

  • #63

    Sure. An engine calculation is based on how it scores a position statically and how far it looks ahead and scores future positions.

    When you walked the engine forward, it scored more future positions, then it fed those scores back to your earlier position. In your case, that information changed how it scored the position you started from.

  • #64

    not sure I buynthat and I have read a lot of material regarding how computers play chess.

     

    I guess the easy to test that theory is try try walking the engine forward and back with the hash tables turned on, then turned off and see what happens.

     

    the only place such a thing would be stored is in the hashtables.

  • #65

    just saying. put that engine away and think for yourself.

  • #66

  • #67

    Thanks for bringing those memories back Morphysrevenges, having to walk trough teenager pee in their concerts was definitely worth it.

  • #68

    MickinMD wrote:

    I agree that computers are not the solution to great understanding. I've said previously on these boards that better than Stockfish 8 telling me the best moves would be stockfish telling me: "Attacking up the Kingside was not a good idea because you had no material superiority. You should have posted your Knight on the impregnable outpost at c5 and attacked up the middle with a Pawn Storm."

    The toughest thing for me to do in chess - outside of stupid blunders in fast time controls - is figure out what to do in the middle game: when do I attack my opponent's pawn chain at it's base as is normally best and when do I attack it at it's top?  How do I take advantage of the half-open file where my rook affects seven squares? Etc.  I have no doubt we'll begin to see such chess engine training within the next decade. Will it be as good as human teachers? I doubt it: they've had great piano teaching software available but the virtuosa who taught me would look disgustingly at a "masterwork" Chopin sheetmusic edition and say, "That's not how to play it - here's how it Chopin did it."  As a major student of a major student of a major student's of Chopin himself, it was like hearing it from the horse's mouth and I progressed far quicker than any self-learning software could do for me.

    I came back to chess this year after last seriously studying the game in 2000. It was like the episode of Star Trek where an Air Force pilot from the 20th Century gets beamed aboard the Starship Enterprise.  The evolution of computer chess, chess engines, Tactics Trainers, better books - I have Silman's 1st Edition of How to Reassess Your Chess and it's around 200 pages.  I just got the 4th ed. and the workbook and they are 658 and 423 pages!

    All that said, computers work if your exploring an opening and want to explore variations on, say, move five.

    Great idea and I think easily doable. Since computers follow heuristics, translating them.in.human language with today's technology seemsc feasible.
  • #69

    Your right everyone, i should be a techonolgy vegan. I'm going to start making cars with my bare hands no tools. So i can give my sister a car when shes 70 not 20. For now she can walk with flip flops made of leaves and i will now take a  crap in a hole next to my neighbor. As we continue watching each other until there is a revolution.

  • #70
    Idiots who worry for no reason about how other people enjoy their lives wrote
     

    Put away your chess engines. 

     

     

    No. Don't like using engines? Don't use them. Worry about how other people like to enjoy the game? Your problem. Waa. 

  • #71
  • #72

    Engines are very helpful, if used in moderation. Problem is, there are people who let computers think for them in the analysis, so they barely learn anything from it: they understand what computer's suggestions are, but they don't understand why, because they've invested too much time into learning how to imitate computers (which is never going to work, because computer and human "brains" work very differently) and too little how to actually play chess. On the opposite end of the spectrum, there are people who never ever interact with engines, thinking either it is below them, or just not knowing how to use engines advantageously and holding on to their old habits and ways of thinking.

     

    "Use, but don't overuse" is a good old rule, totally applicable here. wink.png

  • #73

    Most of the time when I analyze a game after it's over, I see moves that the computer says I should have made and they make absolutely no sense to me. Humans don't play like that, that's how you can tell when someone is using an engine in your game.

  • #74

    If some people dont understand why chess engines makes moves not everybody is just imitating the best moves, i have been playing stockfish everyday and i thouroughly understand every move it makes and its not hard to figure it out. Litteraly judt take the piece and see what happens when you make another move.

  • #75
    matiee wrote:

    If some people dont understand why chess engines makes moves not everybody is just imitating the best moves, i have been playing stockfish everyday and i thouroughly understand every move it makes and its not hard to figure it out. Litteraly judt take the piece and see what happens when you make another move.

    Bull crap!

  • #76

    Your gunna have to believe its, just like how you can find answers to a math test amd run it backwards to see why thats the answer to that question.

  • #77

    Yes this is one of the good reasons to use chess engine it can show you some stuff but its up to you to learn because then there would be no point in engines. Very good example of how positions and forth going can be made better. Also now that he knows this he doesnt have to reach that point in the game they are able to understand pawn strucutre right when the game starts.

  • #78
    LouStule wrote:

    Most of the time when I analyze a game after it's over, I see moves that the computer says I should have made and they make absolutely no sense to me. Humans don't play like that, that's how you can tell when someone is using an engine in your game.

    Engines are programmed based on the general human positional evaluation: material count, open lines, peace activity, pawn structure, central control, etc... If there is a move a strong engine suggests that you don't understand at all and it looks nonsensical to you, then chances are your own understanding of chess needs a lot of improvement, rather than an engine being too inhumane. tongue.png

     

    Where engines really excel is in tactical calculations. There, indeed, there are situations in very complicated positions where an engine would find tactically the best move, which wouldn't even appear in a human mind. Some awkward knight retreat to the corner, which happens to be the only way to avoid a skewer after a complicated 7-move line full of hanging pieces and sacrifices...

     

    But even in such cases, as matiee suggested, you can figure out the idea behind the move by just following the computer lines and see where they lead.

Top

Online Now