Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 12:01:32 11/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 20, 2002 at 13:37:35, Marc van Hal wrote: >On November 20, 2002 at 06:52:52, Stuart Smith wrote: > >>I have just started to play chess and receently bought ChessMaster 9000 which I >>think is an excellent all round package but I'm not too sure if its analysis >>mode is particularily good. Any comments? >> >>I play against a friend at work during my lunch break and usually lose; >>sometimes I seem to be in a winning position and then I end up losing so I would >>like to be able to analyse the games to see where I went wrong. At this point I >>can't really say if I prefer positional or tactical play except to say that I >>try to play positionally and fail, and usually fail to spot the opportunity for >>good tactical play. >> >>What would you advise for such a job (I don't necessarily want the strongest >>playing engine but the 'best' analysis engine, but maybe the two are are >>inseparable). >> >>I am running a P4 2.2GHz with 1Gb RDRAM so processing power shouldn't be too >>much of a problem. >> >> >>Thanks >Sory to say so but for real analyzes all engines still fail. >You must also look for plans yourself >though looking at the analyzes of the program might help you the give a good >indication of some troubles you might face. >Marc van Hal That sounds right to me. But for the typical chessplayer, rated around 1600, the outcomes of the games have more to do with tactical blunders. At least, that was true for my games. Chess engines can flag tactical blunders. Bob D.
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.