|
|
| From | Message |
|---|
baronderkilt
24-Apr-10, 23:45
|
 TAG of course~!
}8-D ... no wait, now I am sure there are things Man is not Meant to know ~!
***
I wonder if the GK beast will ever be bashing it out with Fritz & Rybka & Co !? The Other beast, I mean, Tag, . . .
|
kingdawar
25-Apr-10, 10:31
|
I support kiwisouth's idea above
|
|
Download/Export analysis
I tried to download the analysis to play it over the board but can't seem to get the moves plus the analysis downloaded.
Is there some way to do this?
If not possible could it possibly be a new feature.
|
kingdawar
30-Apr-10, 13:29
|
OK, now some icon has been added. Good.
|
chess_avenger
30-Apr-10, 20:42
|
quick question/suggestion
dont exactly recall the content of the posts here (bad short term memory) but will this feature be available for blitz (realtime) games in the near future? or is it available now and i just dont see it?
|
rookie879
03-May-10, 18:47
|
A question
How come i can see computer analysis for games I didn't analyze or other people's games?
|
chess_avenger
03-May-10, 19:09
|
rookie
I believe everyone can see computer analyzed games of any other person in for example the games history.
|
rookie879
03-May-10, 19:15
|
That's cool!
|
kansasjayhawk
03-May-10, 21:02
|
Great feature!
Thanks for adding this GK!
|
alberlie
18-May-10, 04:33
|
"we are actually not sure how to evaluate the current strength of the engine. I would guess it's at least above 2000, since it was finding inaccuracies in higher rated players' games when we were testing it."
Not sure how you mean. You tested it on games annotated by known strong players such as GMs or something? If you just let it analyze some game by a 2200 player, the fact that it'll disagree with a few moves (i.e. "finds inaccuracies") doesn't mean squat.
My nephew constantly finds "inaccuracies" in my game whenever we play - only trouble is that he's getting mated while in the process of proving his point.
|
lighttotheright
18-May-10, 07:30
|
It's just another tool in the box for all to use. It will catch a lot of mistakes from which players can learn.
But I agree with you alberlie that it won't catch them all. It may even misidentify some good moves as being inaccurate. Humans can make astonishingly brilliant moves that a computer has no hope of understanding, but the reverse is true as well.
The key is to try to understand why the computer says what it does. There is no substitute for using the gray matter in your head to stretch the boundaries of your intrinsic chess ability.
|
kingdawar
18-May-10, 19:19
|
One hundred postgame computer analyses per month
...for Titanium members.
|
fmgaijin
19-May-10, 10:48
|
Use with Grain of Salt
Just ran it on one of my games where I (Black vs. borissp) played the Benko. When the evaluation starts (still well within known theory that considers Black's position playable) it gives White a huge edge. Then, as we proceed into a standard drawn Benko ending, it does not look far enough into the position and keeps assessing my opponent (and occasionally me) as blundering. However, the lines it gives actually peter out into draws if you take them far enough. Mike very reasonably set up the system to give back evaluations quickly. However, that means that at some points (particularly the ending), depth has to be sacrificed. The endgame is already the bane of many programs' evaluation routines (because many material-up positions actually draw or even lose in patterns that humans can learn but are hard to program). Hence, I tentatively suggest that the computer analysis may be great for tactical positions (where even our best can overlook a twist in a complicated line) but not so helpful for closed and semi-closed positions or endgames.
|
untateve
20-May-10, 15:13
|
Good moves--
If possible, I think the computer analysis could be improved if it also provided !, !!, and !? moves rather than just inaccuracies, mistakes, and blunders.
|
schlaffi
26-May-10, 01:44
|
Deleted by schlaffi on 26-May-10, 04:54.
|
|
So you can see where you went wrong in the game and learn from your mistakes. Nice addition, thanks, GK.
|
|
My previous post was in response to schlaffi, who, if I remember correctly, was querying the point/need of the computer analysis. Just so that you can make sense of my reply.
|
schlaffi
26-May-10, 11:55
|
Yes, sorry, I forgot that your posting is hard to understand because I was deleting.
For ME (maybe not for you) the Computer Analyse at Gameknot is not the most important
thing.
I have Scid together with the engines Robolito, Stockfish and Rybka 2.2n.
All is for free.
But maybe there are people which don't know to use it.
|
|
|
