Author: Robert Henry Durrett
Date: 07:09:51 06/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 17, 2002 at 05:13:01, stuart taylor wrote: >On June 16, 2002 at 22:25:50, Robert Henry Durrett wrote: > >>On June 16, 2002 at 20:57:01, stuart taylor wrote: >> >>>I believe a question as to whether to play N:g5 or Bg3 in this kind of position >>>is one of the most difficult desisions in a serious human game in which the >>>results of the game is critical. >>>Only someone of atleast master level can make a confident decision, after some >>>analysis in a tournament game. But the idea? I think ANYONE (of 1800 elo) would >>>think of. Is that not so? >>>S.Taylor >> >>I am/was USCF 1864 human amateur tournament chessplayer and the sac on g5 was >>the very first thing I looked at. I suspect that any experienced human amateur >>tournament player would notice that possibility right away. I also immediately >>noticed Qe7 and "suspected" that Black could defend the position. The sac looked >>too risky. Almost no analysis. Sometimes amateurs make their decision based on >>little more than that, but mostly on the basis of feelings and emotions. >>"Better to be safe than sorry" or "I am in the mood to attack" feelings may >>decide. >> >>The problem with chess amateurs like myself is that they, for whatever reason, >>either cannot or DO NOT perform the analyses properly and in sufficient depth to >>reach a definitive answer. Furthermore, many positions an amateur faces in >>tournament games are either too unfamiliar or too difficult for the amateur to >>reach a clear "best" move. In other words, for the human amateur, it may be >>essentially impossible to come up with a definitive answer in such situations. >>There is a lot of "take your best shot and hope for the best" in human amateur >>chess. I suspect these failings are not uncommon among human masters as well. >> >>But chess engines seem to be quite different from human amateur chessplayers. >>It seems doubtful that most of the [emotional, etc.] difficulties humans face >>are also a problem for chess engines. >> >>QUESTION: What happens in chess engines when there are two equally seemingly >>worthy moves available [in this case, one sacrificial and attacking and another >>relatively "safe" move]? Are all engines the same in the way they handle this >>kind of situation? Perhaps engines never "realize" that two choices are equally >>worthy at all. Engines don't think like humans and certainly don't "get >>excited." >> >>Also, there currently does not seem to be any way to enter tournament >>considerations into the computer. [Ex: "Must win to get prize money" versus >>"Draw is good enough to take first prize," or "I'm really tired and want to >>quit."] >> >>Bob D. > >Sorry, even well below 1800 elo, And I too would always think of N:g5 as a first >thing. IF it would work that would be better than rretreating. >Thoughts are often that even if it doesn't work, you atleast get 2 pawns and >probably atleast the value of another in attacking possibilities if not more. >But that attitude might not only be not accurate, but can even backfire >sometimes! _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Many people really enjoy computer chess, in it's many forms. But playing amateur human-human chess has it's rewards too. The element of risk is exciting. I pity all those chess computers! They cannot "enjoy" their wins. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ >But at first glance, in fact, N:g5 is looked at, and at second glance, I'd say >that there seems no followup. But It's after that, that the thought proccess has >to really start, since I've seen that many combinations and/or attacking play >from master/GM games are a longer proccess, you just have to look a bit, or a >lot further. >If however whites Rook/castle was on e1, that would almost make a considerable >difference, at quick thinking times. So like this, it is a critical thing which >needs exact calculation to see if there a win, or atleast some small gain. >I'm only speaking my feelings from experience which this position reminds me >about. Sorry to bore anyone! >S.Taylor
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.