| |
Main
Date: 07 Oct 2007 23:37:53
From: Sanny
Subject: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
I find after the site was improved not many people play Chess at
GetClub. Is the site not working properly?
Try Chess at: http://www.getclub.com/Chess.html
Once you login you can either look for human opponent or just click a
Level to play with Computer. Are you finding it difficult to play at
GetClub?
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.getclub.com/Chess.html
|
|
| |
Date: 19 Oct 2007 22:20:27
From: TrekNoid
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
On Oct 8, 1:37 am, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> I find after the site was improved not many people play Chess at
> GetClub. Is the site not working properly?
>
I'll be honest, Sanny... I've written this response a few times, only
to delete it again because I am hardly an expert in Chess... and don't
feel that I even approach the level of play discussed in here.
But you keep asking this question, and so I'm going to tell you why
*I* stopped playing your site.
I don't enjoy it... plain and simple.
There's various reasons why I don't enjoy it, and I hope you honestly
take them to heart.
1.) "Beginner/Easy"
Maybe this is just a philosophical thought, but honestly... You come
in here posting, wanting to know why your program loses at Beginner/
Easy level... Isn't that what Beginner/Easy levels are *supposed* to
do?
Don't get me wrong... Even beginners want to be challenged, but
beginners are *supposed* to make mistakes... and a Beginning Level
computer *should* make tactical mistakes. If your Beginner Level is
winning 50% of the time, making occasional blunders... you should be
*happy* about that... It means it plays like a Beginner...
However, when I have to fight off a fork playing at Beginner level, it
feels like it's cheating.
2.) The program's 'attitude'
Again, maybe it's just me, but the constant flashing of "Ha Ha Ha" and
general trash-talking is just too distracting. It doesn't make the
site 'fun'.
3.) Your approach to this...
When I first read about your site, I thought "Great! I may not be a
great player, but maybe I can help this guy test his software at
least"
I've played your program (and lost a bit, admittedly) and offered
feedback about how it takes too long to make moves... even longer than
advertised times.... I pointed out that it allowed for an invalid Pawn
Promotion... and I get *zero* response from you... no "Oh, thanks for
that" or anything... Just a general notation that you've "made the
program better".
Sanny, you're asking a *lot* of people to give up a lot of free time
to quality-check your program for free... and you give no thanks for
it to any of them... then you wonder why they don't return?
I've beta-tested dozens of games (board and computer) in my time, all
the way back to the mid 1980s, and the way to get *good* testing is to
have an open, upbeat dialog with your testers. If you ignore them,
they just go away.
And seriously, Sanny, buy an Analysis Tool already... they're really
cheap, and your credibility won't get shot to heck for asking other
people to do it for you... Even *I* can analyze a game using software
I've bought for under $20... Every time you ask people to analyze a
game, it hurts your site's credibility, because we *know* it's been
built by someone who can't analyze a game.
Do your own analysis... then come and ask more focused questions...
I'm sorry if this comes across as harsh... it's not meant to be... and
I'm hardly a respected chess-player like others here... I'm just
trying to tell you why *I* stopped going there.
TrekNoid
|
| | |
Date: 20 Oct 2007 09:48:41
From: james
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
TrekNoid a �crit :
> And seriously, Sanny, buy an Analysis Tool already... they're really
> cheap, and your credibility won't get shot to heck for asking other
> people to do it for you... Even *I* can analyze a game using software
> I've bought for under $20... Every time you ask people to analyze a
> game, it hurts your site's credibility, because we *know* it's been
> built by someone who can't analyze a game.
He doens't even need to buy one. Arena comes for free as � graphical
interface:
http://www.playwitharena.com/
and there are many free and very good engines available for download on
the same page.
There are many other engines available on the net. ProDeo for example,
which is the free version of the excellent Rebel program is available there:
http://members.home.nl/matador/prodeo.htm
|
| |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 04:57:46
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
On Oct 11, 4:57 pm, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> help bot wrote: and then you have
> > your positional pawn players, who believe the best
> > place for their pieces is just behind their own
> > pawns.
>
> There are only two proper places for pawns:
>
> a) on their original squares a2, b2, c3, f2 g2, h2
> b) in the box at the side of the board.
This seems to be the thinking of Rybka, the world's
strongest chess program. She does not like to
advance her pawns until the endgame, and even then,
she is a tad coy.
Now, according to GM Kmoch, the pawns on the
side of the board in front of the enemy King should
be advanced energetically, to aid in the attack.
Unfortunately, most lines entail castling on the
same side, so this is negated by his other idea:
that home pawns (those pawns in front of one's
own castled King) should remain where they are.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 04:52:17
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
On Oct 10, 1:54 pm, james <[email protected] > wrote:
> Certainly not the most played opening (2.5% only), but however quite =E0
> very decent score (58%)
> [2.Nf3 takes of course the lion's share, with 88% and a score of 56%.]
> 4. Qe3 is by far the most played move. In CB9, it appears 2867 times
> with a score of 57%.
One question is just what sort of quality does
that database have? Many, if not most, of these
databases contain duplicates, games from low-
level players (like me vs. GetClub) in order to
boost the numbers to increase sales. Few are
well-balanced and reliable, and I suspect that
would include the one I give near the bottom of
this post since stepping forward or back, the
scores change kedly in spite of my following
the main lines.
> It has been played recently by Shirov (2710),
> Polgar(2677), Adams(2640), Morozevich(2575) and many others.
> It is quite often played by Degraeve (2540) who had pretty impressive
> results with this line (+4 =3D1 -1) with victories against Almasi (2668),
> or Gyimesi (2525).
>
> 4.Qd1 appears only 146 times with a terrible score: 20%.
Take a look at this link and then try to explain how
CB9 has such titanic numbers, when this public
database has just the opposite, indicating that
Black is (as expected) pretty successful here:
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/explorer?node=3D2209305&move=3D4.5&moves=3De=
4=2Ee5.d4.
exd4.Qxd4.Nc6.Qe3&nodes=3D21720.21721.62581.62582.1815460.2209304.2209305
This link has Black doing exceedingly well with
either ...g6, or ...Nf6 as in the present game. My
computer analysis also indicated that Black was
doing nicely, up until the ...Qf6 blunder, but of
course neither side was playing "optimally". It
is ironic that White ran into trouble over the
exposure of his Queen to attack by lesser men,
while the tables were suddenly turned only when
Black decided to bring out his own Queen -- to
an exposed square.
Strong players like GM Alekhine have played
5=2E ...Be7, followed by an embarrassing display
in which White players try to "attack" desperately,
only to lose like a carrot, as Sanny is fond of
saying. A lot of lower-level players seem to like
this stuff, and most of the recent games I found
were of this variety. The bigger names did have
a 1995 contest in which GM Shirov was
miniaturized by GM Karpov, who played Black.
In sum, White's "attack" or pawn-storm often
never gets off the ground because he goes into
launch mode before developing his pieces; a
typical beginner's mistake.
In any case, even if humans were for some reason
to find this more difficult to play from the Black side
and White were to have reasonable success in
recent practice, the objective score of the position,
from a computer's-eye view is that White is not
looking so good. Black can choose among many
different approaches and it is clear who is ahead in
development, and who has the moral right to attack,
so to speak. The evil minions of stupid-Queen-
moves may have the strong desire to seize the
throne, but they are mere pretenders.
Another issue is that since Sanny's program is
so slow, so weak, it would do best to avoid tricky
tactical positions where it will invariably be out-
calculated by any other program. In view of that,
I would recommend that after 1. e4 e5, 2. d4 ed,
White should probably play 3. Nf3. I was in fact
surprised by how long it took Jester to gain a
substantial advantage; that was not very impressive.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 15:45:47
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
On Oct 11, 5:26 pm, Taylor Kingston <[email protected] > wrote:
> > 3. f3 Qg3++
>
> Followed instantly by 4.hxg3 +-. Preferable seems 3...Qh4#.
Oh, and that move almost certainly would follow,
but not "instantly". This is the Easy level, after all.
(My sources inform me that in fact, Rybka does not
like Qg3 here, much prefering TK's move for some
reason.)
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 15:41:45
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
On Oct 11, 5:26 pm, Taylor Kingston <[email protected] > wrote:
> > Easy level -- Rybka
>
> > 1. g4 e5
>
> > 2. g5 Qxg5
>
> > 3. f3 Qg3++
>
> Followed instantly by 4.hxg3 +-. Preferable seems 3...Qh4#.
I have been known to occasionally lose in blindfold
competition. Note that even here, there are still
drawing chances; have you seen GetClub's endgame?
I expect Rook odds would be about right for Rybka,
except on GetClub's higher levels. Removing White's
QR, I would bet on Rybka to beat the Beginner level.
Now, Queen odds might be overdoing it. A little.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 15:26:16
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
On Oct 11, 6:19 pm, help bot <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Oct 11, 4:53 pm, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > With this program, EVERYTHING takes a very long time.
>
> Not necessarily.
>
> Easy level -- Rybka
>
> 1. g4 e5
>
> 2. g5 Qxg5
>
> 3. f3 Qg3++
Followed instantly by 4.hxg3 +-. Preferable seems 3...Qh4#.
|
| |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 15:19:57
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
On Oct 11, 4:53 pm, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> With this program, EVERYTHING takes a very long time.
Not necessarily.
Beginner level -- Rybka
1. g4 e5
2. f3 Qh4++
Easy level -- Rybka
1. g4 e5
2. g5 Qxg5
3. f3 Qg3++
Rybka -- Normal level
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 f6
3. Nxe5 fxe5
4. Qh5+ Ke7
5. Qxe5+ Ke6
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 14:01:06
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
On Oct 10, 1:54 pm, james <[email protected] > wrote:
> >> 1.e2-e4 e7-e5
> >> 2.d2-d4
>
> > Unless White goes into something like the Goring
> > Gambit (developing, not taking on d4 with the Queen),
> > this is not good.
>
> Certainly not the most played opening (2.5% only), but however quite =E0
> very decent score (58%)
> [2.Nf3 takes of course the lion's share, with 88% and a score of 56%.]
> >> ... e5xd4
> Standard
> >> 3.Qd1xd4
> Standard
More "standard", as you choose to call it, would
be a Goring Gambit with 3. Nf3.
> >> ......Nb8-c6
> Standard
> >> 4.Qd4-e3 Ng8-f6
>
> > Both Black Knights are developed rapidly and to
> > their proper squares -- so far, so good. White
> > chose a poor square for his Queen to retreat to;
> > a better one was her original post on d1.
>
> 4. Qe3 is by far the most played move.
My comment above was made without looking
at this on a chess board; what I meant was that
in general, the White Queen is better off on d1
than here, on e3. In this exact position, the
retreat to d1 would leave the e-pawn weak. I
already noted the exposure of the Queen on the
e3 square, and in fact in the Jester/GetClub
game, it came under swift attack. (Possibly
even, too swift.)
> In CB9, it appears 2867 times
> with a score of 57%.
This kind of data is worthless without further
information; like say, the relative strength of
opposition. Here's an example: let's say I go
to GetClub and play this line, and report a
100% score -- what does that mean? Very
little, I would say.
> It has been played recently by Shirov (2710),
> Polgar(2677), Adams(2640), Morozevich(2575) and many others.
What caliber of opposition did they play it
against? Specifically, did these champions
of early Queen forays play this line against
their superiors? And if so, what were their
results?
> It is quite often played by Degraeve (2540) who had pretty impressive
> results with this line (+4 =3D1 -1) with victories against Almasi (2668),
> or Gyimesi (2525).
That's nice. Would you care to discuss the
merits of the move, or are you only able to
recount a few anecdotal successes? I have
some interesting anecdotes regarding a local
player's favorite attacking line involving the
fool's mate attack, but the trouble is against
decent defense, the Queen sortie is quite
vacuous, except in scholastic play.
> 4.Qd1 appears only 146 times with a terrible score: 20%.
I am not recommending taking on d4 with the
Queen and then later retreating to d1; to the
contrary, what I am recommending is the move
*Nf3* if in fact the move 2. d4 has already been
played. I also do not recommend that move,
unless the Goring Gambit is desired. As White,
I play (practice what I preach) the Ruy Lopez,
which may well be superior to all of these other
lines in that it is not so easy to regurgitate a
series of memorized moves from an old Larry
Evans column in Chess Life from around 1982
to equalize. In fact, I note that when Gary
Kasparov attempted to play the Black side in
a computer match, he went down without a
fight.
One interesting development in the RL is the
use of computers to aid Black's attack in order
to secure a draw. But this approach works both
ways, White being able to find amazing defensive
resources with the aid of super programs like
Rybka or Zappa.
I do not deny the cheap shot potential of having
the Queen on the third rank so early; given a
careless opponent, a cute Bc4 and Qb3 might
net a few fishes; or perhaps Qg3 in combination
with some other attacking move would turn up a
frog or two. The question is, what happens when
you get a bite from a whale or a Great White? Do
you really want to have your Queen dancing out
there with enemy Knights? You have your tactical
piece players who dont mind it; and then you have
your positional pawn players, who believe the best
place for their pieces is just behind their own
pawns.
-- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 00:30:07
From: james
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
help bot a �crit :
> On Oct 10, 1:54 pm, james <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>> 1.e2-e4 e7-e5
>>>> 2.d2-d4
>>> Unless White goes into something like the Goring
>>> Gambit (developing, not taking on d4 with the Queen),
>>> this is not good.
>> Certainly not the most played opening (2.5% only), but however quite �
>> very decent score (58%)
>> [2.Nf3 takes of course the lion's share, with 88% and a score of 56%.]
>
>>>> ... e5xd4
>> Standard
>>>> 3.Qd1xd4
>> Standard
>
>
> More "standard", as you choose to call it, would
> be a Goring Gambit with 3. Nf3.
Wrong.
To address your rek regarding relative strength, we will only
consider games with both players above 2200.
The opening up to exd4 has been played 724 times, with +234=247-243.
White mean rating was 2340 while black was 2355, which means that white,
on the average has a lower rating than black.
Performance for both black and white was 2350, which means that white
performs slightly above their level, while black performs slightly below.
3. Qxd4 is played 427 times while 3.Nf3 is only played 168 times.
So the Goring gambit is not standard even among masters...
The question is whether Nf3 is better than Qxd4. It is, but only very
slightly (53% against 50%), and only above 2200.
If we consider another category (1800-2200 players)there are 702 games,
Qxd4 is played 363 times with a score of 58% while Nf3 is played 170
times with a score of 52% only.
So the statistics just tell us that the Goring gambit is not standard
and that it is better to play Qxd4 if you are below 2200.
|
| | |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 16:57:23
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
help bot wrote: and then you have
> your positional pawn players, who believe the best
> place for their pieces is just behind their own
> pawns.
>
There are only two proper places for pawns:
a) on their original squares a2, b2, c3, f2 g2, h2
b) in the box at the side of the board.
--
Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://www.cis.uab.edu/sloan/
|
| | | |
Date: 12 Oct 2007 13:22:04
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
Kenneth Sloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> There are only two proper places for pawns:
>
> a) on their original squares a2, b2, c3, f2 g2, h2
> b) in the box at the side of the board.
I see you've been playing Mats Winter's variants. ;-)
Dave.
--
David Richerby Simple Disgusting Goldfish (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like a fish but it'll turn your
stomach and it has no moving parts!
|
| |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 13:21:44
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
On Oct 10, 12:16 pm, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> I saw you lost a game with Easy Level. While your position was strong.
> Was the game not recorded properly?
As far as I can tell, the program "resigned me"
while it had the move and was thinking. As you
can see, I was clearly winning, as usual, and
it is impossible for me to accidentally click the
"resigns" button because it only appears when
it is *my turn* to move. I had a disconnect here,
and when I reconnected it started thinking and
then POOF, it jumped to the game-replay screen.
This hasn't happened in a very long time.
-- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 11 Oct 2007 16:53:36
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
help bot wrote:
> On Oct 10, 12:16 pm, Sanny <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> I saw you lost a game with Easy Level. While your position was strong.
>> Was the game not recorded properly?
>
>
> As far as I can tell, the program "resigned me"
> while it had the move and was thinking. As you
> can see, I was clearly winning, as usual, and
> it is impossible for me to accidentally click the
> "resigns" button because it only appears when
> it is *my turn* to move. I had a disconnect here,
> and when I reconnected it started thinking and
> then POOF, it jumped to the game-replay screen.
> This hasn't happened in a very long time.
>
With this program, EVERYTHING takes a very long time.
--
Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://www.cis.uab.edu/sloan/
|
| |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 10:40:14
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
Did you lost the game with easy level or it recorded wrongly?
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 10:16:47
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
> new Web site format has some logic flaws,
> such as when I reconnect during play it asks me
> TWICE what level I want to play, when in fact I have
> no choice at all, according to Sanny. When I go to
> start a new game, there are not one but TWO screens
> where you are asked to choose your level. What may
> happen if you choose one level on the first screen and
> then change your mind for the second one I do not
> know; maybe I will try it; I want to play against the
> Advance level at ten seconds per move!
>
> -- help bot
First time is just for display there arte 5 levels. You can click any
of them to reach where you can play with computer. It is only inside
the Applet you can choose the levels.
I saw you lost a game with Easy Level. While your position was strong.
Was the game not recorded properly?
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 04:46:21
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
On Oct 9, 12:13 pm, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> Here is a game between Easy level and Jester. Please Analyze it for
> mistakes done by GetClub Chess.
>
> White: Jester
> Black Easy Level (GetClub)
I have now analyzed this entire game, and my graphic
user interface, Arena, plotted out a nice graph indicating
the turning points in the game.
It seems that things were going poorly for White until
Black played 9. ... Qf6. If you look at the position after
the stronger moves ... Bc5, 10. Nh3 d6, you will note
that this is rekably similar to a Budapest Gambit,
except that White has clumsily misplaced his Queen.
After 10. f4, the retreat ... Ng6 was unnecessary; a
better approach was ... Bc5 -- again. At this point in
the game White had the better of it, but over the next
two moves the tables are turned. The computer much
prefers 13. fxe5 to the move played in the game.,
which simply leaves Black a pawn ahead with the
better position.
To me, Black's capture on move 21 is utterly
incomprehensible; why take a pinned Knight only to
follow up with castling? This is where the program
shows Black threw away his substantial advantage,
and the follow up 23. Nf4 handed the edge back to
White, which White immediately handed right back
with 24. Nc3 and then 25. Nd5.
By move 32, the position was level and the computer
pinpoints 34. ... b5 as the beginning of Balck's ultimate
downfall, compounded by 36. ... a5 -- loosening up the
pawns so they were easier to attack and win. Still, a
magician of a chess program might still have
maintained a feint glimmer of hope to draw but for the
horrendous 45. ... Rd8 -- giving away another vital
pawn.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 02:26:43
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
On Oct 9, 2:20 pm, Kenneth Sloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> So...it's just the same as it's always been?
No, actually, it is better now. Now there are so few
players at GetClub that when one of my games gets
locked up, Sanny quickly and efficiently responds
here. The trouble seems to have something to do
with my frequent disconnects, in conjunction with
the program allegedly "seeing" checkmate coming
but being directed not to resign until point x. If my
game is disconnected after it detects an oncoming
checkmate, when I reconnect it doesn't seem to
want to play a move. or resign. After several tries
or after several hours and a retry, the problem
vanishes.
When I play humans, I feel a bit awkward because
I am so used to playing the GetClub program, with its
crazy idio-sync-ricies (I can't spell that word to save
my life!).
The new Web site format has some logic flaws,
such as when I reconnect during play it asks me
TWICE what level I want to play, when in fact I have
no choice at all, according to Sanny. When I go to
start a new game, there are not one but TWO screens
where you are asked to choose your level. What may
happen if you choose one level on the first screen and
then change your mind for the second one I do not
know; maybe I will try it; I want to play against the
Advance level at ten seconds per move!
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 02:13:33
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
On Oct 9, 1:39 pm, Taylor Kingston <[email protected] > wrote:
> 4.Qd4-e3 was also a favorite of Winawer's.
How well did he do playing that?
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 02:12:24
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
On Oct 9, 12:56 pm, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> C'mon bot, White's fourth is the main line in the Center Game.
This looks suspiciously like an assumption that a
line's having been named equates to it being good.
> It was played at one time
Indeed, this comment speaks volumes. At one time,
surgeons did not wash their hands.
> or another, often more than once, by Paulsen
So then, a famous player has played a poor opening
line.
> Tarrasch, Chigorin, oczy, shall, Spielmann, Tartakower, and
> more recently Shabalov and Judith Polgar.
So then, if famous players have blundered, then
it is "good" for everyone to blunder; if famous
players once played an inferior opening move, we
should all endorse it; and if famous players have
ever resigned prematurely, then should we not all
make a practice of it? I find that sort of logic
appalling. How about this: what strong player,
today, plays this line as his main weapon? If
somebody can reach the top with that sort of
handicap, we should all be very impressed.
Take a look at some of the games at GetClub.
When I play the Ruy Lopez, for instance, I get a
good position as White which I can work with to
try and build some sort of decisive edge, and then
convert and win. Yet this slop -- especially the
Qe3 move -- yields nothing; zero. Objectively,
the White Queen stands better on her home
square, d1, than on e3 -- except for purposes of
landing a tricky cheap shot very early on.
Black has every reason to try and win after such
inferior moves. It reminds me a bit of the Grob, or
the Orangutan; good for a laugh or two, perhaps.
Certainly a good choice where two players have
secretly agreed in advance to draw their game, as
it gives the joke away to those in the know" while
not being quite so obvious as to attract due
attention.
Another thing it might be good for is where it is
deemed "necessary" to surprise an unwary
opponent, as for example after a loss as White
where no suitable improvement has yet been
found; the point is, the enemy's minions will very
likely suddenly turn their efforts to this unfamiliar
line, while neglecting the real defense
(I am here referring to match play). This idea can
be seen in the famous Fischer/Spassky match,
where GM Fischer threw in an Alekhine's Defense,
among other things, while carefully avoiding any
"discussion" of his published bust to the King's
Gambit.
Here's the real point: the programmers have
apparently added on a bonus to the position score
after early Queen forays, spite checks like ...Bb4+,
and Knight invasions like ...Ng4. (You may have
noted that White chose Bd2 -- a hideous-looking
move that prevents spite checks.) At about move
twelve, White had yet to develop either Knight --
these are tell-tale signs of a misbegotten eval.
function.
In strong chess programs, with no openings book
loaded from which to fetch moves by rote, you will
often notice a decided tendency to favor development
over cheap shot potential; in particular, you will note
how it is best to develop the Knights early, as Black
did in this game. To oversimplify a bit: weak players
like to move the Queen out early; strong ones prefer
to develop their Knights. (You may notice that once
I run out of book, I tend to play moves like ...Qa5 a
lot. LOL)
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 01:19:07
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
> But this game does show one positive thing: if you
> replay these moves on a much stronger program
> you will find that the score went back and forth, the
> two programs apparently being reasonably closely
> matched. When one program is vastly superior, the
> trend generally is that it grabs the advantage quickly,
> and then increases it on almost every turn; that is
> certainly not what happened here -- far from it.
>
Now game improved with more details on tactics. Now even beginner
Level will give good challenge. And Easy & Normal Level will play very
strongly.
Play Chess at:http://www.getclub.com/Chess.html
I play one game with Beginner Level. It took 50 moves to win Beginner
Level. Earlier Jester used to beat in just 30-40 moves. Now It takes
the fight till 50 moves.
So You are going to get more stronger opponent from now on.
Here is the recorded game http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM10840&game=Chess
I cannot write all moves as there were 53 moves. Just see how good
beginner defended its position despite being 2 pawns down.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at:http://www.getclub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 00:29:39
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
On Oct 9, 12:13 pm, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> Here is a game between Easy level and Jester. Please Analyze it for
> mistakes done by GetClub Chess.
>
> White: Jester
> Black Easy Level (GetClub)
>
> Played at:http://www.getclub.com/Chess.html
>
> Recorded Game:http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM10786&game=Chess
>
> 1.e2-e4 e7-e5
> 2.d2-d4 e5xd4
> 3.Qd1xd4 Nb8-c6
> 4.Qd4-e3 Ng8-f6
> 5.Bc1-d2 Nf6-g4
> 6.Qe3-f4 h7-h5
> 7.Bf1-c4 Nc6-e5
> 8.Bc4-e2 Bf8-d6
> 9.Qf4-g3 Qd8-f6
> 10.f2-f4 Ne5-g6
> 11.e4-e5 Ng6xe5
> 12.Bd2-c3 h5-h4
> 13.Qg3xg4 Ne5xg4
> 14.Bc3xf6 Ng4xf6
> 15.Ng1-h3 Nf6-d5
> 16.Ke1-g1 Nd5-e3
> 17.Rf1-c1 Ne3-d5
> 18.Rc1-f1 Nd5-e3
> 19.Rf1-c1 Bd6-c5
> 20.Nh3-f2 Ne3-d5
> 21.f4-f5 Bc5xf2+
> 22.Kg1xf2 Ke8-g8
> 23.Rc1-d1 Nd5-f4
> 24.Nb1-c3 Nf4xe2
> 25.Nc3-d5 c7-c6
> 26.Nd5-e7+ Kg8-h8
> 27.Ne7xc8 Rf8xc8
> 28.Kf2xe2 d7-d5
> 29.Rd1-d4 Rc8-e8+
> 30.Ke2-d3 Re8-e4
> 31.Rd4xe4 d5xe4+
> 32.Kd3xe4 Ra8-d8
> 33.Ke4-e3 Rd8-d7
> 34.Ra1-f1 b7-b5
> 35.Rf1-f4 Kh8-g8
> 36.Rf4xh4 a7-a5
> 37.Rh4-e4 Rd7-d5
> 38.g2-g4 Kg8-f8
> 39.c2-c4 Rd5-d6
> 40.h2-h4 Rd6-d8
> 41.b2-b3 Kf8-g8
> 42.c4xb5 c6xb5
> 43.Re4-e5 Rd8-b8
> 44.Ke3-f4 Kg8-h7
> 45.Re5-e7 Rb8-d8
> 46.Re7xf7 Rd8-d2
> 47.Kf4-g5 Rd2xa2
> 48.f5-f6 Ra2-a3
> 49.Rf7xg7+ Kh7-h8
> 50.Kg5-h6 b5-b4
> 51.f6-f7 White Wins.
>
> Recorded Game:http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM10786&game=Chess
>
> Can you see what mistakes GetClub made?
Let's look at the very end of this game, shall we?
White walked his King up to threaten a mating attack,
and Black "saw nothing" and sauntered over to the far
end to snack on some pawns. Even when the mate is
just a few moves away, Black still "saw no problems"
and chowed down some more.
Look at 45. Re7; this move attacks an undefended
pawn, intending to munch next move. How did Black
reply? He ignored the threat completely, moving his
Rook to an open file. It appears as though Black is
not looking at the opponent's moves at all, but just
doing his own thing (here, eating pawns whenever
possible). Only when it was mate-next-move did we
see the Beginner level halt the game by resignation,
apparently noticing the problem.
Now, I understand that Beginner level does not
exactly "go deep", but it should nonetheless at least
be *attempting* to minimize the damage by defending
attacked pawns and pieces when possible.
This indicates that there is a serious problem still
with elementary tactics. No chess program -- even
a Java applet on Beginner level -- should be having
such problems if the programmers have implemented
tactical "check and capture" search extensions
correctly. Heck, my computer will often go up as
high as 8 or 9 plys in under a second, and that is
finished searches, where the check and capture
extensions may have gone much, much deeper.
-------------------------------
But this game does show one positive thing: if you
replay these moves on a much stronger program
you will find that the score went back and forth, the
two programs apparently being reasonably closely
matched. When one program is vastly superior, the
trend generally is that it grabs the advantage quickly,
and then increases it on almost every turn; that is
certainly not what happened here -- far from it.
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 11:39:20
From: Taylor Kingston
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
On Oct 9, 1:56 pm, Mike Murray <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 10:43:22 -0700, help bot <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Oct 9, 12:13 pm, Sanny <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Here is a game between Easy level and Jester. Please Analyze it for
> >> mistakes done by GetClub Chess.
>
> >> White: Jester
> >> Black Easy Level (GetClub)
>
> >> 1.e2-e4 e7-e5
> >> 2.d2-d4
>
> > Unless White goes into something like the Goring
> >Gambit (developing, not taking on d4 with the Queen),
> >this is not good.
>
> >> ... e5xd4
> >> 3.Qd1xd4 Nb8-c6
> >> 4.Qd4-e3 Ng8-f6
>
> > Both Black Knights are developed rapidly and to
> >their proper squares -- so far, so good. White
> >chose a poor square for his Queen to retreat to;
> >a better one was her original post on d1.
>
> C'mon bot, White's fourth is the main line in the Center Game. It was
> played at one time or another, often more than once, by Paulsen,
> Tarrasch, Chigorin, oczy, shall, Spielmann, Tartakower, and
> more recently Shabalov and Judith Polgar.
4.Qd4-e3 was also a favorite of Winawer's.
|
| |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 10:43:22
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
On Oct 9, 12:13 pm, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> Here is a game between Easy level and Jester. Please Analyze it for
> mistakes done by GetClub Chess.
>
> White: Jester
> Black Easy Level (GetClub)
> 1.e2-e4 e7-e5
> 2.d2-d4
Unless White goes into something like the Goring
Gambit (developing, not taking on d4 with the Queen),
this is not good.
> ... e5xd4
> 3.Qd1xd4 Nb8-c6
> 4.Qd4-e3 Ng8-f6
Both Black Knights are developed rapidly and to
their proper squares -- so far, so good. White
chose a poor square for his Queen to retreat to;
a better one was her original post on d1.
> 5.Bc1-d2 Nf6-g4
Uh-oh. There is no point in chasing the Queen
off its (exposed) square (e3); Black should develop
his pieces rapidly and figure on exploiting the
Queen's position later on.
> 6.Qe3-f4 h7-h5
Is there a bonus for invading enemy territory?
One Knight, by itself, cannot accomplish much.
> 7.Bf1-c4 Nc6-e5
> 8.Bc4-e2 Bf8-d6
> 9.Qf4-g3 Qd8-f6
> 10.f2-f4
I don't have a board, and am trying to visualize
this blindfolded, so to speak. It seems as though
both sides are intent of self-destruction, and the
concept of "normal development" is a complete
stranger to them both. I get the distinct feeling
that both programs are giving themselves a hefty
bonus for aggressive, attacking moves, even if
such moves are very bad. Instead of developing
and then castling to safety, they are conducting
some crazy tactical swashbuckling with only a
very few pieces.
> Can you see what mistakes GetClub made?
I would definitely have to look at this with a
chessboard. Better still, because it is so messy,
I would have to let Fritz look at it while I look. : >D
-- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 20:54:23
From: james
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
help bot a �crit :
> On Oct 9, 12:13 pm, Sanny <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Here is a game between Easy level and Jester. Please Analyze it for
>> mistakes done by GetClub Chess.
>>
>> White: Jester
>> Black Easy Level (GetClub)
>
>> 1.e2-e4 e7-e5
>> 2.d2-d4
>
> Unless White goes into something like the Goring
> Gambit (developing, not taking on d4 with the Queen),
> this is not good.
Certainly not the most played opening (2.5% only), but however quite �
very decent score (58%)
[2.Nf3 takes of course the lion's share, with 88% and a score of 56%.]
>
>
>> ... e5xd4
Standard
>> 3.Qd1xd4
Standard
>> ......Nb8-c6
Standard
>> 4.Qd4-e3 Ng8-f6
>
> Both Black Knights are developed rapidly and to
> their proper squares -- so far, so good. White
> chose a poor square for his Queen to retreat to;
> a better one was her original post on d1.
>
>
4. Qe3 is by far the most played move. In CB9, it appears 2867 times
with a score of 57%. It has been played recently by Shirov (2710),
Polgar(2677), Adams(2640), Morozevich(2575) and many others.
It is quite often played by Degraeve (2540) who had pretty impressive
results with this line (+4 =1 -1) with victories against Almasi (2668),
or Gyimesi (2525).
4.Qd1 appears only 146 times with a terrible score: 20%.
|
| | |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 10:56:36
From: Mike Murray
Subject: Re: Analyze this Game
|
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 10:43:22 -0700, help bot <[email protected] >
wrote:
>On Oct 9, 12:13 pm, Sanny <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Here is a game between Easy level and Jester. Please Analyze it for
>> mistakes done by GetClub Chess.
>>
>> White: Jester
>> Black Easy Level (GetClub)
>
>> 1.e2-e4 e7-e5
>> 2.d2-d4
>
> Unless White goes into something like the Goring
>Gambit (developing, not taking on d4 with the Queen),
>this is not good.
>
>
>> ... e5xd4
>> 3.Qd1xd4 Nb8-c6
>> 4.Qd4-e3 Ng8-f6
>
> Both Black Knights are developed rapidly and to
>their proper squares -- so far, so good. White
>chose a poor square for his Queen to retreat to;
>a better one was her original post on d1.
C'mon bot, White's fourth is the main line in the Center Game. It was
played at one time or another, often more than once, by Paulsen,
Tarrasch, Chigorin, oczy, shall, Spielmann, Tartakower, and
more recently Shabalov and Judith Polgar.
|
| |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 10:13:33
From: Sanny
Subject: Analyze this Game
|
Here is a game between Easy level and Jester. Please Analyze it for
mistakes done by GetClub Chess.
White: Jester
Black Easy Level (GetClub)
Played at: http://www.getclub.com/Chess.html
Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM10786&game=Chess
1.e2-e4 e7-e5
2.d2-d4 e5xd4
3.Qd1xd4 Nb8-c6
4.Qd4-e3 Ng8-f6
5.Bc1-d2 Nf6-g4
6.Qe3-f4 h7-h5
7.Bf1-c4 Nc6-e5
8.Bc4-e2 Bf8-d6
9.Qf4-g3 Qd8-f6
10.f2-f4 Ne5-g6
11.e4-e5 Ng6xe5
12.Bd2-c3 h5-h4
13.Qg3xg4 Ne5xg4
14.Bc3xf6 Ng4xf6
15.Ng1-h3 Nf6-d5
16.Ke1-g1 Nd5-e3
17.Rf1-c1 Ne3-d5
18.Rc1-f1 Nd5-e3
19.Rf1-c1 Bd6-c5
20.Nh3-f2 Ne3-d5
21.f4-f5 Bc5xf2+
22.Kg1xf2 Ke8-g8
23.Rc1-d1 Nd5-f4
24.Nb1-c3 Nf4xe2
25.Nc3-d5 c7-c6
26.Nd5-e7+ Kg8-h8
27.Ne7xc8 Rf8xc8
28.Kf2xe2 d7-d5
29.Rd1-d4 Rc8-e8+
30.Ke2-d3 Re8-e4
31.Rd4xe4 d5xe4+
32.Kd3xe4 Ra8-d8
33.Ke4-e3 Rd8-d7
34.Ra1-f1 b7-b5
35.Rf1-f4 Kh8-g8
36.Rf4xh4 a7-a5
37.Rh4-e4 Rd7-d5
38.g2-g4 Kg8-f8
39.c2-c4 Rd5-d6
40.h2-h4 Rd6-d8
41.b2-b3 Kf8-g8
42.c4xb5 c6xb5
43.Re4-e5 Rd8-b8
44.Ke3-f4 Kg8-h7
45.Re5-e7 Rb8-d8
46.Re7xf7 Rd8-d2
47.Kf4-g5 Rd2xa2
48.f5-f6 Ra2-a3
49.Rf7xg7+ Kh7-h8
50.Kg5-h6 b5-b4
51.f6-f7 White Wins.
Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM10786&game=Chess
Can you see what mistakes GetClub made?
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at:http://www.getclub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 01:55:36
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
> *any* points after a full night of tussling with the
> Master level! (Now that's a tough opponent.) This
> is why I normally play the three weaker levels, so I
> can finish a game or two in one sitting.
>
> -- help bot
Instead of playing with Master level you should play with Normal
Level. Master takes 5-10 min/move while Normal takes just 2-3 min /
move. So you can finish 2 games with normal level in the time you take
one game to finish with Master Level.
Play Chess at: http://www.getclub.com/Chess.html
Beginner=1/3 points == 0.3 points/win
Normal = 2 points/win. So 1 Game with normal level gives as much point
as winning 6 games of Beginner Level.
and Master 3 points/win
So just play 2 Games with Normal Level daily and you will earn 2*2=4
points that is about 12 wins with Beginner Level.
It is easy to win 2 Games with Normal Level than Playing 12 Games with
Beginner. You only have limited number of free Games. So it is wise to
play Normal. Even if you play 30 Games with Normal Level in a month
you will get 60 Points {assuming you win all}. Else you have to play
180 Games with Beginner Level to get 60 points.
And you only have arround 120 free games to play So if you play all
with Beginner Level you will get only 40 points. If you play all with
Normal Level you can get 240 points. So you will get more Prizes and
you have more chances of playing free games.
However if you still want to play with beginner level then your free
games get Exhausted and you need to purchase 100 games for just $10.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.getclub.com/Chess.html
|
| | |
Date: 10 Oct 2007 09:28:36
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
Sanny wrote:
>> *any* points after a full night of tussling with the
>> Master level! (Now that's a tough opponent.) This
>> is why I normally play the three weaker levels, so I
>> can finish a game or two in one sitting.
>>
>> -- help bot
>
> Instead of playing with Master level you should play with Normal
> Level. Master takes 5-10 min/move while Normal takes just 2-3 min /
> move.
Want to bet?
--
Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://www.cis.uab.edu/sloan/
|
| |
Date: 08 Oct 2007 03:38:28
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
On Oct 8, 1:37 am, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> I find after the site was improved not many people play Chess at
> GetClub. Is the site not working properly?
Apart from the problem of getting a "choose level"
screen twice when reconnecting to a game in progress,
I thought it was working fairly well.
My "current" game though seems locked up; I am
two moves from delivering checkmate, by my
calculation, and the program will not make a move
though I have reconnected numerous times to let it
think long and hard. Thus, I was unable to rack up
*any* points after a full night of tussling with the
Master level! (Now that's a tough opponent.) This
is why I normally play the three weaker levels, so I
can finish a game or two in one sitting.
-- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 09 Oct 2007 14:20:00
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Are you facing problem playing at GetClub Chess.
|
help bot wrote:
> On Oct 8, 1:37 am, Sanny <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I find after the site was improved not many people play Chess at
>> GetClub. Is the site not working properly?
>
>
> Apart from the problem of getting a "choose level"
> screen twice when reconnecting to a game in progress,
> I thought it was working fairly well.
>
> My "current" game though seems locked up; I am
> two moves from delivering checkmate, by my
> calculation, and the program will not make a move
> though I have reconnected numerous times to let it
> think long and hard. Thus, I was unable to rack up
> *any* points after a full night of tussling with the
> Master level! (Now that's a tough opponent.) This
> is why I normally play the three weaker levels, so I
> can finish a game or two in one sitting.
>
>
> -- help bot
>
So...it's just the same as it's always been?
--
Kenneth Sloan [email protected]
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://www.cis.uab.edu/sloan/
|
|
