x
Chess - Play & Learn

Chess.com

FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store

VIEW

Stockfish is blind!

  • #861

    Terrible, the rook is stupid and the knights aren't really doing anything, the knight on the 6th rank can jump to c4, but that's about it

     

  • #862

    Well, after h5 the wB has no target and is partially bad. 

  • #863
    Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

    Since many here think I am weak and not worhty of writing good books,

    above is a position from one of my games against Stockfish played on talkchess

    forum in late 2014.

    TC was 30 minutes per game, so close to analytical.

    How many people will find the move with which I won against Stockfish?

    Qh4 for forced mate

  • #864
    Nordlandia wrote:
    Lyudmil Tsvetkov: how do you evaluate black's chances for draw after the following exchange sacrifice. 

     

    Dear Jon-Fredrik,

    I already told you, white should win, but it might take 50-60 or more moves.

    You know very well you need 5 or 6 days to analyse this to perfection, please, spare me the effort now, we have analysed similar positions and the 2 rooks are usually very strong in the late endgame, if they penetrate mate might follow.

    Obviously though, perfect play is a very difficult thing and no one could be 100% certain.

    The point is, this move is fully meaningless: why sac a whole exchange, when Nc4 instead perfectly draws?

    Making suboptimal moves can hardly be good.

  • #865
    josephyossi wrote:
    Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

    Since many here think I am weak and not worhty of writing good books,

    above is a position from one of my games against Stockfish played on talkchess

    forum in late 2014.

    TC was 30 minutes per game, so close to analytical.

    How many people will find the move with which I won against Stockfish?

    Qh4 for forced mate

    Unfortunately, Qh4 is weak due to h7-h5, and gh6 capture is impossible as the queen on h4 would be hanging.

    Qh4 leads to a fortress draw.

    The only winning move is Qf6+!!

    Get my book to know more: https://en.chessbase.com/post/the-secret-of-chess

  • #866
    Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
    josephyossi wrote:
    Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

    Since many here think I am weak and not worhty of writing good books,

    above is a position from one of my games against Stockfish played on talkchess

    forum in late 2014.

    TC was 30 minutes per game, so close to analytical.

    How many people will find the move with which I won against Stockfish?

    Qh4 for forced mate

    Unfortunately, Qh4 is weak due to h7-h5, and gh6 capture is impossible as the queen on h4 would be hanging.

    Qh4 leads to a fortress draw.

    The only winning move is Qf6+!!

    Get my book to know more: https://en.chessbase.com/post/the-secret-of-chess

    Don't.

  • #867

    The way to get a positive score against Stockfish is easy: play it with the evaluation running so you can see the lines it's considering, and take back the bad moves that don't work. 

     

    Then publish all your wins, claiming that you have some great insight into chess itself.

     

    Those who know how to play chess will see through this though. If there were a way to consistently play as well as Stockfish, the chess professionals would have discovered it.

  • #868
    darthion wrote:
    Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
    josephyossi wrote:
    Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

    Since many here think I am weak and not worhty of writing good books,

    above is a position from one of my games against Stockfish played on talkchess

    forum in late 2014.

    TC was 30 minutes per game, so close to analytical.

    How many people will find the move with which I won against Stockfish?

    Qh4 for forced mate

    Unfortunately, Qh4 is weak due to h7-h5, and gh6 capture is impossible as the queen on h4 would be hanging.

    Qh4 leads to a fortress draw.

    The only winning move is Qf6+!!

    Get my book to know more: https://en.chessbase.com/post/the-secret-of-chess

    Don't.

    Don't what?

    I explained why Qh4 is bad.

    Don't you think so?

     

  • #869
    SmyslovFan wrote:

    The way to get a positive score against Stockfish is easy: play it with the evaluation running so you can see the lines it's considering, and take back the bad moves that don't work. 

     

    Then publish all your wins, claiming that you have some great insight into chess itself.

     

    Those who know how to play chess will see through this though. If there were a way to consistently play as well as Stockfish, the chess professionals would have discovered it.

    I am the biggest chess professional around.

    Unfortunately, today, after a lot of work, I am tired and only able to draw SF even with handicap.

     

  • #870

    Ok, Lyudmil. Why is it that nobody who has read your book is able to discern what your method is? Wasn't your book supposed to illuminate your method?

  • #871

    That is a strong and unfair statement.

    Many people are delighted by the book.

    See what Christopher Parsons has written for example on 'The Secret of Chess' thread: he recommends the book to stronger club players, so, just like you, in case your 2160 rating is also OTB one.

    The method is simple: patterns.

    The more you know, the stronger you are.

     

  • #872

    Or, did you mean my method of beating the top engines in 'Human versus Machine'?

    If you mean that, the method is obvious:

    - closed positions

    - pointed chains

    - backward shelter pawns

    All methods of play, requiring huge depth and refined evaluation, precisely where the engines are weak.

  • #873
    Like this is a duplicate forum of the advertising campaign for that book.
  • #874

    Most of the threads have been started by people I have nothing to do with, so it is not me to blame.

    People are seemingly interested.

    I am trying to provide chess content for the threads started by me from time to time, but when people ask, you should respond.

Top

Online Now