Author: Uri Blass
Date: 14:44:04 12/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 06, 2002 at 16:20:39, Stephen Ham wrote: >On December 06, 2002 at 13:07:32, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>On December 06, 2002 at 12:56:18, Stephen Ham wrote: >> >>>This was interesting, although the question is vague. For example, I don't use >>>any chess engines to analyse during my games; I find my own moves. However, I >>>use Nimzo 7.32 to blunder check to ensure I'm not hanging material >>>(unknowingly!) before posting the move. >> >>So if you find out that you did, you alter your move. This is effectively >>using Nimzo for analysis during the game. IMHO saying you find your own >>moves is hypocrisy. >> >>The poll is largely based by the popularity of the engine, not it's >>qualities. You won't pick ... as your favorite analysis engine if you >>never owned it. >> >>-- >Dear Gian-Carlo, > >You may indeed be correct...I might be a hypocrite. I inittially struggled with >the morality of blunder checking. To date, blunder checking hasn't found any >blunder and so I haven't altered any of my moves. Still, it's inevitable that it >will happen. Yes, when it does happen, I will then change my move. There are 2 possible ways of blunder checking(one is to check if there is a blunder in your move and another one is to check if there is a blunder in the tree that you analyzed). I understand that you only check if there is a blunder in the move that you send but you do not check if there is a blunder in the analysis that the move is based on. Knowledge about mistakes in the tree can be more productive. A tactical mistake in the tree may lead to positional mistake in the move and even if it does not change the opinion about the best move it still can lead to better analysis of the next moves. 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.