In this forum I frequently see the post like: 'show me my mistakes' or 'help me to analyze my games'. But when I look at the last games played by a player I frequently see than there almost no computer-analyzed games for that player.
Lichess provides an extremely helpful server side analysis which in less than a minute provide a high quality analysis of the game. So why only a small percentage of games is analyzed?
Especially for the lower rated and new players, the computer analysis is too difficult to understand. Having someone explain in simple English is much easier to comprehend and learn.
An analogy is the cryptic numerical errors that computers throw. Many computer programmers understand these codes, but a newbie could be confused. Just my thought.
@nikolajtesla : "...why...? The answer is quite simple: Because the result is counterintuitive.
@jonesmh : The guy who invented numerical error codes (not return values) should better step on the other side of the street if we ever meet. See this link for one of the most annoying examples: docs.oracle.com/cd/B28359_01/server.111/b28278/toc.htm. It is a legend that some admins learn them all by heart.
@Makropoulos I think numeric error codes have their justification if you look to microcontrollers, ... A string does at least take much more memory, sometime even more computing resources to handle.
That said, you are definitely true, that the should not be used nowadays if their is no clear justification against working with a human-readable error message.
@nikolajtesla I bet the majority play blitz because it is fun and provides a quick rush. Analyzing games is all about delayed gratification in exchange for achieving some goal in the future. I'm sure many players using blitz, and even bullet, to test out openings, middlegame ideas and endings use it regularly and systematically.
@jonesmh Lower-rated players usually make many egregious mistakes and blunders per game and these more often than not are because of bad habits like hanging pieces or ignoring simple tactics rather than stuff that needs to be interpreted by an expert chess player. They could easily greatly benefit from the feature, even by only focusing on that type of blunder.
Because if people stopped interacting in ways that could be replaced by computers, then soon none of us would ever talk to one another at all.
@Chuck_Fess : ++##
I analyse my games.
You can't post in the forums yet. Play some games!