Author: Jeroen van Dorp
Date: 04:13:21 08/09/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 09, 2001 at 06:19:01, Uri Blass wrote: >I do not have the impression that weak players use the chess computer method. >They have enough time at tournament time control to do 1 ply search and 1 ply >search after the move that they plan to play but they do not do it and a common >mistake of amatuers is not to play a move simply because they did not analyze it >or to lose material or to do a positional mistake because they did not consider >the opponent reply even for one second. > You should really read the article, if you didn't already. The way Graham tells it is a one line synopsis of an article, which is a synopsis of a research project. That's logical. The comparison lies not so much in raw calculating, but in the necessity of *assessing* each chess position from ground zero. The extensive use of their memory sets strong chess players up to constantly recall both the current situation as well as the development of the position, leading to pattern recognition, and better results. With this they can -based on the position characteristics- develop a plan and the candidate moves much more easily. As the weak chess player lacks this level of pattern recoginition, he has to assess the position a bit like a basic chess program does: start crunching all move sequences. For a computer program this still can result in very strong play - because of node speed - but as the human brain hasn't got the ability to not only tune up to that speed, but store and retrieve the analysis tree in a useful manner, the *weak* player will oversee even the most simple countermoves of the opponent. Basically the research seems to indicate that *memory* is very important, and the lack of it leads to more basic and flawed methods of calculation, *not* that the strong player thinks like a human and the weak like a computer. Nothing new under the sun, as these results confirm earlier research. And we all *know* that, as we play the same. Well know fact is that drilling with (simple) tactical combinations makes you aware of the possibilities of recognizing them in real play. I am *not* a strong chess player, but with my training and after-game analysis I'm always looking almost *automatically* for these positional characteristics. Just a few days ago I have been looking at numerous games with the sicilian in the ECO B50's range, as I have good results with those opening as black, but very often am stuck with a weak pawn on d6. I kick my opening books aside and specifically tried to identify the *characteristics* of games in which black won the game, although the d6 pawn (as a plus pawn for white) was nicked off the board. Not looking for a 'move sequence' how to solve it, but characteristics of piece placement and strong and weak points. A basic chess program won't do that, as well as a weak chess player. It's not surprising that chess programs like Shredder 5, Hiarcs 7.32, Chess Tal II, Junior 7 and the like are so warmly received. J.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.