Crazy how openings change as the rating ladder goes up, and when I mean change, I mean change drastically. It makes sense, of course, that there will be change, but for that much change, is incredible to look at on a graph.
This goes to show the opening diversity in chess when looking at opening/rating data.
This goes to show the opening diversity in chess when looking at opening/rating data.
A typo in several subtitles:
1. d4 Nf6. 2. c4 Nf6 (again)
1. d4 Nf6. 2. c4 Nf6 (again)
<Comment deleted by user>
1d4 Nf6 . 2 c4 Nc6
You mean!
You mean!
Nf6 double, exclam
Super cool way to present this concept. Props
very interesting, I would like to see other diagrams like these on moves other than 1. d4 even if the idea was to see that the main moves are played more by strong players.
and juste a small mistake : I suppose it's 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 (and not Nf6 again)
good discussion using lichess data.. thanks.
question in the methodology.
is this only about rated games? or all games? any difference if one makes rated and not rated bins... perhaps some difference in dispersion?
Also when determining popularity and using position..
i read the remark about london system, but it seems to be not part of the methodology, rather more the discussion of the results. If the API follows the opening explorer choices, there might be a lot of work needed to reorganize the opening popularity by position characteristics. The strict version of this: all transpositions, might be clearer.. but the interactive opening explorer is not meant to help answering that.. or is it, at API. Oh I forgot: Using the total number rather that the move line stats at input position should be in API.
I might have some misunderstand buried in my questions. so, in summary, i am asking if there are differences if focusing on position not move from position.... (nuance). this would be more inclusive of transpositions.. i think.. (with possible misconceptions).
There questions are exploratory... I don't think they needed to be addressed in the blog.. just curious..
Thanks for putting notions of relevance in the discussion to various walks of chess.
question in the methodology.
is this only about rated games? or all games? any difference if one makes rated and not rated bins... perhaps some difference in dispersion?
Also when determining popularity and using position..
i read the remark about london system, but it seems to be not part of the methodology, rather more the discussion of the results. If the API follows the opening explorer choices, there might be a lot of work needed to reorganize the opening popularity by position characteristics. The strict version of this: all transpositions, might be clearer.. but the interactive opening explorer is not meant to help answering that.. or is it, at API. Oh I forgot: Using the total number rather that the move line stats at input position should be in API.
I might have some misunderstand buried in my questions. so, in summary, i am asking if there are differences if focusing on position not move from position.... (nuance). this would be more inclusive of transpositions.. i think.. (with possible misconceptions).
There questions are exploratory... I don't think they needed to be addressed in the blog.. just curious..
Thanks for putting notions of relevance in the discussion to various walks of chess.