joy&peace wrote: ↑Sat Jun 08, 2019 6:08 pm
This one is from the other day, I drew a 2300 rated player.
I was winning most of the game, ...
46...Nxc5 made it a draw, however. Instead, 46...a2 wins (this was my idea but I mis-played it.)
I was playing a game against a GM many years ago and felt I had a good shot at winning the game, so refused a draw and went for the win. I ended up losing. But I don't regret taking the shot.
Here are a couple of web pages I have on chess: http://d-chess.com/
and from there you can click on The Zen of Chess, The Top 10 chess players of all-time (imo)
A good number. Not very specific, but as I mentioned I discovered, studying A0's games is kind of beautiful. Not easy to describe how much it is beneficial... Memorizing them, is really my best.
I grew up playing tournaments, my first one was 10 round, 3 days when I was 11 or 12, and the games were 5-6 hours.. Now I play mostly quick games.. I study a lot, but then play quick games.. 3 0, 5 3, 1 0 and 5 5, are the main ones I play. This one was 3 0.
Carlsen plays blitz of course, and his FIDE blitz rating is close to 2950 or so. The only other thing I really study besides A0 or tactics (Chesstempo is very good for that) is Carlsen's Banter Blitz. He said he doesn't do 1 0 on there because there's not enough time for commentary, but he does play them.
3 0 and 5 0 are mostly the ones he does on there. There are only 3 of them.
But, I know I wrote a lot about it, but mostly it's all A0 and, secondly, tactics. I like to play different time controls, they help each other.
I also played the computer (using Chess's app, chess.com's app)... Actually first I would just use it in the browser.... It's nice to play vs., as it's high level.... Helps to play without ego..... However, as I always want to play the highest...
Possibly SF will one day be surpassed by humans
Lukeinaz thank you, I love to talk or share... I have definitely spent a lot of my life on it. I think it's a good thing for culture and society.
I play chess on my iPhone, set to a level where I can win, but not always, and not that easily. It's set to ELO 1600 if that means anything. It's a nice little app called ChessPro. Regrettably nobody in my social circle plays chess, otherwise I'd play real people from time to time.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
I play on LiChess. My main motivation is not get beat by my kid, and am a 1500ish player over the board. I love the the history of chess and the fact there is zero luck in chess. All the moves are sitting right there.
That's really awesome, Keith. Do you get to take your kid to any tournaments? Those are really great for children. Fun and learning concentration, and spatial logic and all the rest that is chess.
I'm not a good player, but I dearly love the game and have played since I was a kid. These days I have no one play, I get in maybe one game per year:(
I have been teaching my 10 year old how to play and she is getting into it.
"...if you think about how many hours, months and years of your life you've spent looking at things, being fascinated by things that have now passed away, then how wonderful to spend even five minutes looking into the nature of your own mind."
Johnny Dangerous wrote: ↑Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:53 am
I'm not a good player, but I dearly love the game and have played since I was a kid. These days I have no one play, I get in maybe one game per year:(
I have been teaching my 10 year old how to play and she is getting into it.
That is really awesome. That is a fairly perfect age to begin, and the same skills are really great for all of life. (Patience, critical thinking, concentration, study ability, as well as intuition, visualization, and performance.)
And of course many more creativity, oh, and confidence...
A0 is the nickname, so to speak, of AlphaZero. It looks funny but it's shorter and easier. A0 changed chess, and it's like flight, or telephones, or something similar in it's advance, in that nothing similar to it has ever been seen.
Games and positions of A0 are unique, and so far beyond anything ever seen. There's a beauty in them, throughout them, that's totally new. So - SF, was the best computer, and A0 won tremendously, 255-6 with over 800 draws. Also was winning in time odds, up to 10-1... (The article says the ratio, but not the exact amounts, I.e. one minute to 10, or 5 to 50.). At 30-1 the SF engine pulled ahead.
To answer your question specifically, it's a neural network program that learned chess from scratch, without algorithms (saying what pieces are valued as, or saying which positions are good). To say the least, it succeeded marvellously. A0 will do things like sacrifice numerous pawns for a positional advantage. It will play so deep (long term, positionally) that SF will have its pieces all in a corner. And also it will sacrifice pawns for a long term positional advantage on the opposite side of the board... And then execute a successful attack.
One of the most striking things is how beautiful the positions are, throughout. Many times there is a total elegance of structure.
As mentioned, I've found there's nothing like studying A0's games. I.e., there's nothing that improves one's ability, depth, breadth, and skill nearly as much.
One of the great things is that it bridges the gap, between something that high and those on every other level.
For example, if someone who doesn't know the equations looks at calculus or other math, virtually none of it can be absorbed, i.e., they can't learn much. But the opposite is true with A0. Even if someone is new or a beginner, nothing is better than A0 for studying, because all of the basics - piece movement, openings, positional, and each of these can be understood at every level. Mediocre, moderate, master.
A0 has a different style of chess. There's always been dynamics at high levels of chess, but never to such an extent.
So anyway, it's wonderful and revolutionary.
To answer your question a little further Lukeinaz, there's maybe 50-60 games that I could remember (have again) if I went over them once. Maybe twice that or so.... Smyslov, Botvinnik, Alekhine, a lot of others. . .
I mentioned Chessmetrics.com - this site ranks historical players and gives an adjusted rating. Of useful importance, it analyzes who was at their peak, and who was number 1 in the world at which times.
For instance, Smyslov was at his peak roughly from 1953-4 to 1958, and was highest rated for much of this time. So games from that time are especially likely to be very good.
But anyway. I'm not trying to paise Smyslov - just going back a bit.
Back when A0 came out, in early 2018, they released only 10 games... Of course we all wished for more games, but it's okay. They took time to sort through them (and of course probably, to build anticipation/ interest.)
Just these 10 games were a treasure, though, and I spent tons of time on them... My appreciation always grew. I would frequently study (and meditate) for many hours a day on them.
Then finally this year, a more full complement came out, two hundred and twenty are available... Mostly draws, otherwise mostly wins for A0, with a couple of losses.
The shortest win is 42 moves, and many of the draws are 255 moves. (The longest game is this length.)
Wayfarer wrote: ↑Mon Jun 10, 2019 5:14 am
I play chess on my iPhone, set to a level where I can win, but not always, and not that easily. It's set to ELO 1600 if that means anything. It's a nice little app called ChessPro. Regrettably nobody in my social circle plays chess, otherwise I'd play real people from time to time.
It seems Zen and chess go together, at least on here.
Well I got to to my best rating for blitz, 2048, then I slowed down... I wanted to keep going higher so I paused and kept studying.. But, I think that's a distraction, I mean, wanting to keep your rating. After I waited - I played one game on the day I got up to 2048, then next day I lost 3 in a row! Trying to keep the rating up was a distraction.. However my fast game improved, and I'm up to 2055 on that. It's got a nice thing to it which is, even if you're caring a lot, the strategy is still the same. You absolutely must play to the time.
I love how each time limit is very unique, with a completely different feel. So, while my 3 0, which has been one of best, faltered, my 5 3 and bullet are both okay. In fact my bullet seems to have improved. It seems to show that performance again requires a certain mindset.
I feel I'm much stronger than my rating, after all, I've beaten and drawn a 2500 player in slower games, a good friend of mine. One of the things about 3 and 1 minute games, is players are less likely to leave the game and make the opponent wait to win... 5 3 is too long for impatient players... but it's a good time control, and fortunately it does seem at a certain level that players leaving to make one wait seems to not be there.
Chess in general is a huge distraction for me. More like an addiction or guilty pleasure. Very difficult to mantain open presence while focusing so acutely. I play mostly 5 minute and feel agitated afterwards.
But I don't regret taking the shot. 
Sorry to burden you with extra questions.
