Author: Odd Gunnar Malin
Date: 09:54:11 01/04/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 03, 2004 at 19:16:25, Bob Durrett wrote: >On January 03, 2004 at 17:32:42, Odd Gunnar Malin wrote: > >>On January 02, 2004 at 11:32:28, Bob Durrett wrote: >> >>>On January 02, 2004 at 02:13:51, Odd Gunnar Malin wrote: >>> >>>>On January 01, 2004 at 20:55:49, Bob Durrett wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>I don't have his book but I have read his column at ChessCafe. >>It is a good place to get input for a coach, but for (young) beginners the >>language barrier for none nativ english speaking is too high. > >There must be good coaches in countries which speak Norwegian. Dan is good but >not unique. You may be one of them! The unique is that he offer this stuff free on the web. >>If you get the beginner to think through the 3 points I mention above before >>each move he allready have taken a big step. >>1. Any of my pieces in price. >>2. Can I take an opponent piece for free. >>3. When I do the move I thinking of, can my opponent take any free pieces. > >If one wished to create a "black box" which made move choices which were >consistent, statistically, with the above three situations, then that "black >box" might be useful as a sparring partner for the purpose of providing the >player with the opportunity to spot and punish such errors. > >For example, the "black box" could be programmed to occasionally overlook the >fact that one of it's pieces is enprise. The probability of occurrence of this >event might be adjustable so that improvement of the human learner could be >matched by reduction of the probability of the occurence of this event in the >"black box" output. > OK, here. >Similarly, the "black box" could be programmed to occasionally fail to capture >pieces which were enprise. The probability of occurrence of this event might >also be adjustable so that improvement of the human learner could be matched by >reduction of the probability of the occurence of this event in the "black box" >output. Not OK. (See below) > >Finally, the "black box" could be programmed to make moves which allowed the >human to capture an enprise piece. The probability of occurrence of this event >might be adjustable so that improvement of the human learner could be matched by >reduction of the probability of the occurence of this event in the "black box" >output. > OK >>One way to get some knoweledge for what kind of errors is to look at games >>played by the beginner. >>At our club we have got the beginners to write down their games. They most play >>rapid or blitz games, but for rapid ( >=30 min) there is enough time for they to >>write the moves down. > >I believe that it is essential that the game scores of weaker players not be >mixed up with game scores of stronger players because the CHARACTER and rates of >occurrences of the errors will be heavily dependent on the ratings of the >players. > I'm not sure what your point is here. A database should include all games, as a designer of the database you don't know what the user want. The only offer you can give is an easy way for the user to select his wanted games. For the rating issue there is a little problem with unrated players because the tag for 'unrated' is an addition to the pgn-spec. and isn't handled by the main gameviewers ([WhiteElo "-"]). I just tested it and it didn't seems to do any harm neither so I will use it in the database below. In addition I will of course write it in plain text in the event/remark field as before. >>I have put up some games at the WEB: >>http://norbase.sjakk.biz/index.php?page=base&lang=en&inter=14&subpage=search&fdate=2003&siteid=22&eventid=50&action=view >>>Instead, one might determine how each of the above "most common" mistakes would >>>affect the selection of moves. From that, it might be possible to model >>>[statistically or otherwise] the move outputs of the "players rated 800-1400." >>>In other words, what is desired is to create a "black box" who's chess games >>>could not be distinguished from the chess games of "players rated 800-1400." >>> >> >>With the exception that the focus should be to help, eg. allways punish an >>error. > >Please elaborate. > In my above beginner sample. The three points for a beginners error are listed, but if the opponent (program) don't take the pieces offered by the player this case would go unnoticed and the player haven't learned anything. More general. If you have a set of rules for a certain level, the engine should play at this level normaly but for punishment of player errors it should play on the next level. >>I saw in Jesper Hall's book (I think) a method to learn that is adaptable to a >>playing program. The method is simple, the board should be 1 move behind the >>actual game. After some practice this could be 2 moves and so on.. >>- White move 1.e4 on the scoresheet eg. tell the program. >>- Black move 1.e5 on the scoresheet. >>- White moves 2.Nf3 on the scoresheet and 1.e4 are updated on the board. >>By this the player is allways in 'analyze' mode. > >An interesting and novel idea. > Knowing this, it could be done with a normal chessboard and a commandline engine (winboardengine) for testing. But of course it needs a GUI for common use. >>Yes, playing against human opponents is better and of course even more 'better' >>if the opponent is stronger than the player because he would punish your >error. > >But if too strong, he will not make punishable errors simple enough for the >student to recognize. The student would get no practice at spotting and >punishing errors. Best is if he is on the next level maybe (+100-200 Elo). >>I don't like to use any computer for analyzing, it would spoil you 'best' >>chessbook you can get that is your own games. These games should be analyzed >>over and over and eventually they have found their errors. > >That may not be a realistic expectation for the very young who have limited >attention spans and have not yet developed the necessary self-discipline. > This is of course one of the main issue with writing down the games, encourage to do analysis after the game with the opponent and at home. Odd Gunnar
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.