GameKnot: club forum - Why the better computer programs for post game analysis?

Play online chess!

Why the better computer programs for post game analysis?

« Back to club forum

From	Message
deeper_insight 05-Mar-17, 07:06	Deleted by deeper_insight on 05-Mar-17, 07:29.
deeper_insight 05-Mar-17, 07:29	Why the better computer programs for post game analysis? This thread is not necessarily for beginners or players south of,say,1800.But when you move up to class "A"(1800-1999)you begin to take your game analysis deeper and deeper to extrapolate move and positional data from the game to see if some moves could have been refuted,better moves developed or your game loss OR win could have gone the opposite direction,for or against your opponent or in YOUR favor instead.This analysis,can in conclusion,help you out in future games that illustrate to you what you missed in a position that may reappear down the line.The program can further illustrate the end result of a sacrifice or the conclusion of exchanging that Bishop instead of your Knight in open or closed games.The learning process for you is infinite! Now,some older programs are "ok",like Rybka and the older Fritz and Shredder programs.But the older,dusty programs can easily miss many deeper positional strategic areas of the board that the newer programs(some of which are free to download)will not miss with the overall strength of that program exceeding 3000 in rating,deeper search which takes less time with narrowing the ply depth parameters specifications(no need to get into that for now!),advanced contempt settings and more. By "seeing"what this silicon monster could have or would have done in some tactical positions or long term strategies,it can ingrain an idea or thought pathway into your own mind to spot patterns of moves that bubble up on the surface of any number of future games occurring.Or it can give you a mini lesson in what you should have moved to win or draw in that game you just finished.The GK post game computer analysis cannot accomplish this for you,only give you a pawn value assessment of a specific move and then the GK analysis is many times inaccurate and not to be trusted...compared to a superior program like Stockfish,Komodo or Fritz 15.So,its up to you!You can use dull greasy worn out tools to take your car apart or use those snap-on tools that are the perfect fit for your car and designed for professional mechanics. Here is an example of a post game analysis between two GM's played at the 42nd World Chess Olympiad Open (2016 in Baku,Azerbaijan): Game: GM Chao B. Li(FIDE 2746 CHN) GM Nigel Short (FIDE 2666 ENG) 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Nf3 b6 5. e3 Bb7 6. Bd3 O-O 7. Bd2 d5 8. cxd5 exd5 9. O-O Nbd7 10. Rc1 a6 11. Ne5 Re8 12. f4 Nf8 13. Be1 c5 14. Bh4 c4 15. Bc2 b5 16. g4 Qb6 17. g5 Ne4 18. Nxe4 dxe4 19. Qe2 Bd5 20. Qg2 Qb7 21. f5 Nd7 22. Ng4 Kh8 23. Bg3 Rac8 24. Qh3 f6 25. g6 Nf8 26. Rf2 Rc6 27. Rcf1 a5 28. Rg2 a4 29. Rf4 c3 30. bxc3 Bxc3 31. Bh4 Qb6 32. gxh7 Re7 33. Ne5 fxe5 34. Bxe7 exf4 35. Bxf8 Bxd4 36. Qg4 Rc7 37. Qh5 f3 38. Rg4 Be5 39. Bc5 Qh6 40. Qe8+ Kxh7 41. Qxe5 Rxc5 42. Qe7 f2+ 43. Kg2 Bc4 44. Kxf2 Qxh2+ After move#44,white resigned. You can copy/paste above PGN into the viewer: chesstempo.com Some of the so called greatest games are considered positional masterpieces,the above game being no exception....until you switch on the computer!That,many times tells a different story of a reality that could or should have occurred(especially on the GM levels) to change the entire outcome of the game!The program in post game analysis is the one to tell you that your "brilliant"Knight sacrifice was actually grossly unsound!Or that your small strategic decision on move #25 was a piece losing blunder! Yes,it is sort of mournful when the beauty of human thought is kicked down by the cold,stark poetry of the computer,but computers do show us the reality of what could or should have been accomplished in those positions and that so called "brilliant" moves were not really brilliant at all,just a misguided illusion of forced reality that actually had many other eddies of reality to traverse to escape that loss! Yes,programs are the "spoilsports" of modern chess,but are a necessary tool in the present era to distinguish the "truth"about many games showing the true pathways to betterment in not only our games,but other games of the GM's.So,even GM's can and do learn later on about that loss,blunder,win or draw that could have gone down a different swampy current in the fog,rather than the main current they traversed and it cost them a loss. The above game is no exception!! Above,even though white lost,he missed draws such as 39. Qe8!Qxe3+ 40.Kh1 However,the real depressing thing(according to the analysis of Stockfish) was that white MISSED a WIN with 34.f6!! A key insert line variation correlates 34....Rxf6 35. Rxf6,gxf6 36.Bxe4!,Bxe4 37.Bxf6!,Qxf6 38.Rg8 mate.A more superior try by the machine analysis was 36....Bc4! So,in conclusion,the game would have become one of the "immortals"after the Marshall like 36.Qe6!! forced mate 36....Rcxe6(or Rexe6) then 37.Rg8 but it never happened. So,there is a long story of past "brilliant"chess games that when run through a program end up punctured and come out with ??.The flip side of the record,however can resurrect forgotten chess games of yours or others that plain Jane games have been played in genius ways. So,even though the above game could have been a win for white,not a loss(GM game),the same analysis can be applied to much lesser rated players trying to reach more lofty rating levels by using the snap on tools of a program to better our understanding of the different outcomes of reality that could have or "should have" occurred.

From

Message

deeper_insight
05-Mar-17, 07:06

Deleted by deeper_insight on 05-Mar-17, 07:29.

deeper_insight
05-Mar-17, 07:29

Why the better computer programs for post game analysis?

This thread is not necessarily for beginners or players south of,say,1800.But when you move up to class "A"(1800-1999)you begin to take your game analysis deeper and deeper to extrapolate move and positional data from the game to see if some moves could have been refuted,better moves developed or your game loss OR win could have gone the opposite direction,for or against your opponent or in YOUR favor instead.This analysis,can in conclusion,help you out in future games that illustrate to you what you missed in a position that may reappear down the line.The program can further illustrate the end result of a sacrifice or the conclusion of exchanging that Bishop instead of your Knight in open or closed games.The learning process for you is infinite!

Now,some older programs are "ok",like Rybka and the older Fritz and Shredder programs.But the older,dusty programs can easily miss many deeper positional strategic areas of the board that the newer programs(some of which are free to download)will not miss with the overall strength of that program exceeding 3000 in rating,deeper search which takes less time with narrowing the ply depth parameters specifications(no need to get into that for now!),advanced contempt settings and more.

By "seeing"what this silicon monster could have or would have done in some tactical positions or long term strategies,it can ingrain an idea or thought pathway into your own mind to spot patterns of moves that bubble up on the surface of any number of future games occurring.Or it can give you a mini lesson in what you should have moved to win or draw in that game you just finished.The GK post game computer analysis cannot accomplish this for you,only give you a pawn value assessment of a specific move and then the GK analysis is many times inaccurate and not to be trusted...compared to a superior program like Stockfish,Komodo or Fritz 15.So,its up to you!You can use dull greasy worn out tools to take your car apart or use those snap-on tools that are the perfect fit for your car and designed for professional mechanics.

Here is an example of a post game analysis between two GM's played at the 42nd World Chess Olympiad Open (2016 in Baku,Azerbaijan):

Game:

GM Chao B. Li(FIDE 2746 CHN)
GM Nigel Short (FIDE 2666 ENG)

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Nf3 b6 5. e3 Bb7 6. Bd3 O-O 7. Bd2 d5 8. cxd5 exd5 9. O-O Nbd7
10. Rc1 a6 11. Ne5 Re8 12. f4 Nf8 13. Be1 c5 14. Bh4 c4 15. Bc2 b5 16. g4 Qb6 17. g5 Ne4 18. Nxe4 dxe4 19. Qe2 Bd5 20. Qg2 Qb7 21. f5 Nd7 22. Ng4 Kh8 23. Bg3 Rac8 24. Qh3 f6 25. g6 Nf8
26. Rf2 Rc6 27. Rcf1 a5 28. Rg2 a4 29. Rf4 c3 30. bxc3 Bxc3 31. Bh4 Qb6 32. gxh7 Re7 33. Ne5 fxe5
34. Bxe7 exf4 35. Bxf8 Bxd4 36. Qg4 Rc7 37. Qh5 f3 38. Rg4 Be5 39. Bc5 Qh6 40. Qe8+ Kxh7 41. Qxe5 Rxc5 42. Qe7 f2+ 43. Kg2 Bc4 44. Kxf2 Qxh2+

After move#44,white resigned.

You can copy/paste above PGN into the viewer:

chesstempo.com

Some of the so called greatest games are considered positional masterpieces,the above game being no exception....until you switch on the computer!That,many times tells a different story of a reality that could or should have occurred(especially on the GM levels) to change the entire outcome of the game!The program in post game analysis is the one to tell you that your "brilliant"Knight sacrifice was actually grossly unsound!Or that your small strategic decision on move #25 was a piece losing blunder!

Yes,it is sort of mournful when the beauty of human thought is kicked down by the cold,stark poetry of the computer,but computers do show us the reality of what could or should have been accomplished in those positions and that so called "brilliant" moves were not really brilliant at all,just a misguided illusion of forced reality that actually had many other eddies of reality to traverse to escape that loss!

Yes,programs are the "spoilsports" of modern chess,but are a necessary tool in the present era to distinguish the "truth"about many games showing the true pathways to betterment in not only our games,but other games of the GM's.So,even GM's can and do learn later on about that loss,blunder,win or draw that could have gone down a different swampy current in the fog,rather than the main current they traversed and it cost them a loss.

The above game is no exception!!

Above,even though white lost,he missed draws such as 39. Qe8!Qxe3+ 40.Kh1

However,the real depressing thing(according to the analysis of Stockfish) was that white MISSED a WIN with 34.f6!! A key insert line variation correlates 34....Rxf6 35. Rxf6,gxf6 36.Bxe4!,Bxe4 37.Bxf6!,Qxf6 38.Rg8 mate.A more superior try by the machine analysis was 36....Bc4!

So,in conclusion,the game would have become one of the "immortals"after the Marshall like 36.Qe6!! forced mate 36....Rcxe6(or Rexe6) then 37.Rg8 but it never happened.

So,there is a long story of past "brilliant"chess games that when run through a program end up punctured and come out with ??.The flip side of the record,however can resurrect forgotten chess games of yours or others that plain Jane games have been played in genius ways.

So,even though the above game could have been a win for white,not a loss(GM game),the same analysis can be applied to much lesser rated players trying to reach more lofty rating levels by using the snap on tools of a program to better our understanding of the different outcomes of reality that could have or "should have" occurred.

« Back to club forum

GameKnot: play chess online, monthly chess tournaments, chess teams, Internet chess league, chess clubs, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database and more.