Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 17:19:21 01/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 01, 2004 at 17:21:35, Alan Grotier wrote: > > Does a chess player rated around 1500 and playing mostly against chess >engines, need a chessbase "X" or a Chess Assistant "X" etc to obtain the variety >of analysis features that seem to be offered by these databases or >does a standard chess engine such as Fritz 8 offer the same analysis features? > > I will not be competing seriously and just need to examine my own mostly lost >games.But want the best analysis features available at this time. > > Alain Alain: Here are a few of my perceptions, opinions, prejudices, "humble" thoughts and possibly bad ideas which you may find to be helpful: This bulletin is interesting because it points to an important application of chess software. There are many out there, like Alan Grotier, who wish to get better at chess and hope, beyond hope, that software will somehow help them. Programmers, especially those who hope to eventually profit financially from their efforts, do produce various kinds of useful chess software and probably do consider the needs of such users. However, my perception is that the needs of the amateur chessplayer are not given much consideration at this time. Chess engines and database management programs do not complete the list of types of software available! There are also products such as Chess Mentor, a programmed learning tool. Such learning tools can be especially useful for people rated around 1500. Any chess engine having a large opening book and having the capability for automated analysis would be useful for post-mortem analyses. The infinite analysis feature of Fritz [and many other chess-playing programs] is also quite useful for post-mortem analyses. [It is not necessary to purchase the strongest or most expensive chess engine.] The learner would not do badly to use the opening book which came with the chess engine as his/her sole source of opening data. This should be supplemented by a good printed text book on general opening theory, because there are basic ideas to be learned in the opening. As the individual advances to higher levels, more study of texts on specific openings might be helpful [to get specific "ideas" explained in print by IMs and GMs] but that should not be necessary at the 1500 level, or even at the 1900 level. I have done [with and without the help of chess software] many in-depth analyses of amateur blitz games and found that the tactical errors are so numerous that almost every other move is a learning opportunity in chess tactics. Typically, tactical errors almost completely dominate such games. This suggests that 1500 players focus primarily on improving their tactical skills until their rating goes up a at least four hundred points. The only way to measure one's true performance level is to enter rated human vs human tournaments. The best games for this purpose are the long-time-limit events. One must obtain good measurement data to be able to quantify one's improvement. Generally, the usefulness of chess software is very limited for amateurs, IMHO. The aspiring amateur needs much more than just chess software. A good [human] friend who is a strong player could help much more than all the software in the World, IMHO. Study of elementary texts on middlegame and endgame basics would also help more than most chess software, IMHO, except possibly for the programmed learning software. Playing games against humans rated about the same is also educational, helping one to learn how to avoid "stupid mistakes" and to learn the good habit of spotting and punishing the opponent's blunders. Playing games against "dumbed-down" chess engines may be useful but probably not, also IMHO. Playing games against Fritz at full strength is a good way to get burned out on chess and to soon give up the game entirely. You will never reach the endgame that way, and so will learn nothing about endgames! Maybe someday in the distant future there will be chess engines which can play credible human-like chess at the 1200-2200 levels. Right now, there seems no motivation for the programmers to produce such a product. One can only hope that a programmer will do that in our lifetimes. Doubtful. 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.