Author: blass uri
Date: 01:48:44 06/03/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 02, 1998 at 21:31:44, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On June 02, 1998 at 18:51:26, blass uri wrote: > >> >>On June 02, 1998 at 12:54:52, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On June 02, 1998 at 11:22:58, blass uri wrote: >>> >> >>>>good players do also other things >> >>>>2) if they do not see a forced line >>>>(they have no time to check all the possibilities) >>>>they can use a statistics to decide >>>>if they see in a position that every line they analyze >>>>leads to their win when they play against themselves >>>>they decide to go to the position. >>> >>> >>>I don't believe human players do this. I personally analyze concrete >>>variations when appropriate, and rely on intuition when it is not >>>possible >>>due to time constraints. Given the chance and the time, I'll analyze to >>>reach a position I feel I can win. Given less time I'll resort to my >>>intuition to recognize positions I should be able to win... and I will >>>be wrong on occasion by doing so. That's one of the things that >>>separates >>>the GM from the IM and so forth. The GM's "intuition" is better. >> >>I do not do this because I cannot imagine clearly the final position >>but I believe many correspondence players do it. >> >>Uri > >I bet you do both... have you ever looked at any of the Win At Chess >positions, or similar XXX to move and win positions? And you can find >forced mates? That's all this is about. You *know* it is forced >because >you looked at all the alternatives... But in other positions, you >search >a move or two ahead, and say "I like this" or "I don't like this" and >rely on intuition rather than concrete variations... I did not talk about positions with tactical forced lines. in correspondence game when there is a position I know I do not understand and there is no forced line the best thing I can do is to play against myself and if one side win to try to improve the defence of the other side if I see that I cannot improve the defence of the loser I decide to believe one side wins I cannot be sure about it because I cannot check all the possibilties. practically in 2 hours per 40 moves I cannot do it because I cannot imagine clearly the final position that can be 30 plies after the move I play so I rely on intuition. of course there is a problem of time in 2 hours per 40 moves but I believe if I could imagine clearly the final position sometimes when it is important to know if I win or lose some unclear position I would think a lot about one move and use the idea of using statistics to decide. I believe grandmaster do it sometimes for example in the following position I have in my book (creative chess): r1b2rk1/pppp1pp1/8/4pnB1/3n4/1BNP4/PPP2PP1/R3K2R white to move Gufled won by 14.Nd5 Nxb3 15.Nf6+ gxf6 16.Bxf6 Ng7 17.axb3 Re8 18.g4 Re6 19.g5 b6 20.Ke2 e4 21.d4 e3 22.f3 d5 23.Rh4 Ba6+ 24.c4 dxc4 25.Rah1. how did the grandmaster find 15.Nf6+? I believe he understood it is an unclear position tried to play it against himself and did not find a good defence for black so he decided it is good for white. Uri
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.