ok
i suppose i m going to chess club regulary...
i suppose i m going to chess club regulary...
Only reason why you would want to play versus computers is to learn won endgames or find new variations/flaws in your repertoires, but as a beginner I would not focus your attention on that. Just play against humans.
@Scandination First time in my life have I heard anyone giving advice to a beginner to play vs the computer. Who even plays against the comp as part of their training? Besides Naka :p
Please don't give advices in subjects you know nothing John Snow
@Spinoza13 Just play, preferably slower games, and if you have the mental fortitude study a book or two, alongside playing, its a bit better this way, and if you have the money get some coaching, all 3 combined is optimal, but mainly have fun playing and learning the game
Please don't give advices in subjects you know nothing John Snow
@Spinoza13 Just play, preferably slower games, and if you have the mental fortitude study a book or two, alongside playing, its a bit better this way, and if you have the money get some coaching, all 3 combined is optimal, but mainly have fun playing and learning the game
@MorningCoffee
Do you have any studies showing that you learn faster playing correspondance than if you play vs computer? It sounds absurd. A computer will show you why your moves are bad tactically, which is exactly what beginners need to learn. Over a few games you'll develop a natural feel for which kind of opening mistakes are common and how to exploit them. You'll also learn how to play to not get punished in the opening.
When you play human opposition you won't get punished like you get vs computer. They let you get away with stuff and play inferior moves and inferior ideas while the computer shows ways of nullifying your different sacrifices and concepts.
It's probably because it's still new that people frown upon it. Teachers don't like it when they get outperformed. Noone likes losing their job.
The next generation is already using the computer to an insane degree. Pretending like the computer is not our greatest resource when it comes to learning chess is denying the sun exists. Silly.
Do you have any studies showing that you learn faster playing correspondance than if you play vs computer? It sounds absurd. A computer will show you why your moves are bad tactically, which is exactly what beginners need to learn. Over a few games you'll develop a natural feel for which kind of opening mistakes are common and how to exploit them. You'll also learn how to play to not get punished in the opening.
When you play human opposition you won't get punished like you get vs computer. They let you get away with stuff and play inferior moves and inferior ideas while the computer shows ways of nullifying your different sacrifices and concepts.
It's probably because it's still new that people frown upon it. Teachers don't like it when they get outperformed. Noone likes losing their job.
The next generation is already using the computer to an insane degree. Pretending like the computer is not our greatest resource when it comes to learning chess is denying the sun exists. Silly.
Li'l Puppet plays blitz to relax - going into each game with the thought of losing. Therefore, when LP wins, it's a nice surprise. Li'l Puppet plays the same openings as White and Black (giving the opponent a free piece as White - and hunkering down in the fetal position as Black) this boosts the ego of the opponents that win and sends them on their way happily hoarding their worthless points. It's what Puppet does. Example of the Li'l Puppet "HUNKER DOWN." as BLACK. lichess.org/8HZDfucaE2OJ
Example of Lil' Puppet's WHITE FREE PIECE dangling in front of the enemy like a piece of cheese in plain view of the rat. Move #4 go ahead rat, eat Li'l Puppet's Bishop - then choke on it in a matter of seconds. lichess.org/K0JJo13m/white#8
Another example where the enemy eats Li'l Puppet's FREE WHITE BISHOP on move 5 and as the foe feels his throat slowly close up, with his last dying breath he curses ever trying to grab at Puppet's pieces like a small spoiled child grabs candy from a younger sibling... lichess.org/PComOdtE/white
Example of Lil' Puppet's WHITE FREE PIECE dangling in front of the enemy like a piece of cheese in plain view of the rat. Move #4 go ahead rat, eat Li'l Puppet's Bishop - then choke on it in a matter of seconds. lichess.org/K0JJo13m/white#8
Another example where the enemy eats Li'l Puppet's FREE WHITE BISHOP on move 5 and as the foe feels his throat slowly close up, with his last dying breath he curses ever trying to grab at Puppet's pieces like a small spoiled child grabs candy from a younger sibling... lichess.org/PComOdtE/white
@Scandination
the engine just gives moves. It produces very high quality in the moves it produces but you, or anyone, as a student,how are they going to learn from that? Especially at <2400 fide rating. Are you gonna just copy the moves? In every case?Or maybe you can try to copy the thought proccess of the machine and calculate 20 million positions per second.
OR you can try to learn as a human, learn abstract concepts alongside your calculative training. Tell me what has playing against the machine taught you about space advantage and how to handle it, or maybe tell me what have you learned about exhanging pieces. The f***ing world champion reads books, plays against humans , has coaches and seconds and only analyses with the computer.
But yeah, maybe in the future people will think as machines, that's the core of your argument. But hey till you manage to calculate at least 1 m nodes/ sec what you do for learning is not very productive
Edit Lil_Puppet is the best( although I am a cat person:) )
the engine just gives moves. It produces very high quality in the moves it produces but you, or anyone, as a student,how are they going to learn from that? Especially at <2400 fide rating. Are you gonna just copy the moves? In every case?Or maybe you can try to copy the thought proccess of the machine and calculate 20 million positions per second.
OR you can try to learn as a human, learn abstract concepts alongside your calculative training. Tell me what has playing against the machine taught you about space advantage and how to handle it, or maybe tell me what have you learned about exhanging pieces. The f***ing world champion reads books, plays against humans , has coaches and seconds and only analyses with the computer.
But yeah, maybe in the future people will think as machines, that's the core of your argument. But hey till you manage to calculate at least 1 m nodes/ sec what you do for learning is not very productive
Edit Lil_Puppet is the best( although I am a cat person:) )
I'd like to chime in here; as I have chosen to learn chess via being taught by a computer. As someone (who you can see on my profile) has utilized rapid 10 vs Stockfish from level 3 to currently level 5 - I can explicitly state with experience that utilizing a computer is only valid with utilization of chess books and other useful resources.
The computer has an incredible use; which has honed a skill which I personally feel in my play now exceeds most average players around the 1600-1750 level that I verse in my own local area which is identifying unbalanced positions and capitalizing on mistakes. It however comes with a heavy drawback of teaching you unusual positions and non-human like concepts that can be hard to convert as a human. And I find that positions that should be covered by basic theory that I should know become very difficult and unusual leading to very weird unbalanced play.
Stockfish will play excessively strong moves at all levels of play. Level 1 Stockfish can and will play best computer moves. Each level of Stockfish however does seem to have an increasing number of blunders / mistakes / inconsistencies.
This has taught me a few incredibly useful skills. Identifying safer moves ( I am in no way avoiding all mistakes but have drastically reduced my blunders and mistakes) and capitalizing on blunders and uneven positional mistakes.
This has been double edged however; as I now feel that I have a 'style' of play that no longer follows basic human play - and I am starting to find human designed books more difficult to follow as time goes by and my progress is slowing as I have a hard time breaching the difference between computer play and human engineered concepts.
TLDR; as someone who has used computers excessively to attempt to fast track learning chess; it has some very identifiable clear advantages; but can (and has) caused problematic drawbacks and requires supplemented learning with human input to be effective. I cannot recommend it for anyone outside a general utility for analysis.
The computer has an incredible use; which has honed a skill which I personally feel in my play now exceeds most average players around the 1600-1750 level that I verse in my own local area which is identifying unbalanced positions and capitalizing on mistakes. It however comes with a heavy drawback of teaching you unusual positions and non-human like concepts that can be hard to convert as a human. And I find that positions that should be covered by basic theory that I should know become very difficult and unusual leading to very weird unbalanced play.
Stockfish will play excessively strong moves at all levels of play. Level 1 Stockfish can and will play best computer moves. Each level of Stockfish however does seem to have an increasing number of blunders / mistakes / inconsistencies.
This has taught me a few incredibly useful skills. Identifying safer moves ( I am in no way avoiding all mistakes but have drastically reduced my blunders and mistakes) and capitalizing on blunders and uneven positional mistakes.
This has been double edged however; as I now feel that I have a 'style' of play that no longer follows basic human play - and I am starting to find human designed books more difficult to follow as time goes by and my progress is slowing as I have a hard time breaching the difference between computer play and human engineered concepts.
TLDR; as someone who has used computers excessively to attempt to fast track learning chess; it has some very identifiable clear advantages; but can (and has) caused problematic drawbacks and requires supplemented learning with human input to be effective. I cannot recommend it for anyone outside a general utility for analysis.
interesting...
@MorningCoffee can i ask you why you have no title? your rating is very high...
@MorningCoffee can i ask you why you have no title? your rating is very high...
A bit of topic, but how do you go from Shogi to chess?
Shogi is infinitely more interesting than chess.
Shogi is infinitely more interesting than chess.
@Spinoza13 It requires some procedure and never bothered
I am FM with two IM norms, (3 are required for the IM title, its a work in progress:)
Edit: I will say one thing about shogi: Komugi -anyone got the reference?(that was my first introduction with shogi)
I am FM with two IM norms, (3 are required for the IM title, its a work in progress:)
Edit: I will say one thing about shogi: Komugi -anyone got the reference?(that was my first introduction with shogi)
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.