Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 61
  1. #16
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,805
    Quote Originally Posted by LyudmilTsvetkov View Post

    I also have been a career diplomat for quite long, and hold a PhD in political science, so am not that simplistic as one
    might think.

    later
    As I am PhD as well...I recon both of us are going to kick Magnus, Vishi and Garry hard! Surely they won't last for any more than 20 movies against a PhD

    On a more serious note, the fact that you've been a career diplomat...makes your claims even more entertaining!
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  2. #17
    CC Grandmaster road runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    on the skin of the pale blue dot
    Posts
    12,490
    Quote Originally Posted by LyudmilTsvetkov View Post
    I am a candidate master with way above average grandmaster strength, maybe at least 2600 elo, lowest possible estimate.
    ...
    12 years ago I played my last competitive game, and then my Bulgarian rating(same as FIDE) was over 2200.
    meep meep

  3. #18
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,509
    Quote Originally Posted by jammo View Post
    Clearly the author is the greatest chess writer since Franklin K Young put pen to paper. A genius ahead of his time.
    jammo and MichaelBaron agree on something (and I concur)!
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  4. #19
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by jammo View Post
    Clearly the author is the greatest chess writer since Franklin K Young put pen to paper. A genius ahead of his time.
    Thank you Jammo for drawing the most illuminating works of Franklin K Young to my attention.
    Southern Suburbs Chess Club (Perth)
    www.southernsuburbschessclub.org.au

  5. #20
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,793
    OK, after seeing the discussion I had to see what all the fuss was about, so I read the excerpts, and the immediate impression I get is of a promising idea (turning deep computer understanding into explained general principles) executed unevenly. As a playing model, trying to keep loads of values in your head just doesn't work. In fact, for the endgame, your play might be just as good whether you know the objective assessment or not. As for the principles, the list of numbers for some principles feels more confusing than helpful - it would be clearer to express the principle as e.g. 'The closer the pawn to the centre, the more valuable it is in the middlegame'.

    On the other hand, the excerpt on imbalances was executed well, with positions clearly indicating what makes the pieces clearly better, equivalent or worse than the queen. Of course, it could be expressed more succintly by 'the more stable the position and pieces, the better they perform against the queen', but all in all a good effort for the purposes of positional evaluation. After all, humans are more likely to remember these position images and the understanding behind them than a set of numbers (we don't think like silicon computers)!

    In the past I had wondered how to express the idea of structural flexibility in chess and I think what the author was trying (but failed) to say is that the flexibility of the pawn structure is determined by how easily the pawns can move without creating exploitable weaknesses in the formation. For instance, if I have pawns on d4 and e4, I can play e5 or d5 with the support of the other pawn, but I leave the remaining central square on the fifth rank open to occupation. But with pawns on f4/e4/d4, I could play d5 and still have the e5 square covered by my pawns. Unfortunately the system in the book seems to not appreciate the value of space, especially in positions with several minor pieces each on the board. The concept of a space disadvantage is a noteworthy one but not in the examples used.

    I noticed that there seemed to be a reward in the evaluation for a pawn defended twice (such as d4/e3/c3). There would be some logic to that when the opponent opts for a kingside fianchetto, but just as it's hard to consider the piece harmony without considering the pawn structure, the pawns shouldn't be taken completely in isolation - if White was missing a light-squared bishop in that c3/d4/e3 structure, it would be easy to imagine problems occurring on that colour complex.

    The permanent outposts section examples were appropriate, though it could be expressed more succintly by stating that the outpost becomes more valuable based on the piece's control of the opponent's half of the board and overall mobility (thus covering the point that a 6th rank outpost may prove stronger than a 7th or 8th rank outpost). The definition of semi-outpost used is not the conventional one, but I think it shows a useful idea that wasn't explained - a piece's value is determined not just by its mobility but also its security - how easily can it be attacked, particularly by a pawn in the case of strategic positions?

    I suppose the main difficulty such a book has in terms of sales is that club players are unlikely to draw these conclusions from reading the book, while those able to will already understand most of the concepts.

    Anyway, the author is welcome to give his thoughts on my interpretation of his concepts.
    Grandmaster, FIDE Trainer, 2018-19 Australian Champion

    Do you love your chess as much as I do?

    What is your chess dream?

    Are you willing to do what it takes?

    Everyone who is an expert at something now...learned from another expert.

    Share your chess journey with me – illingworthchess@gmail.com – and I’ll give you my 7-Page Basic Chess Training Plan, to direct your chess training and improvement.

  6. #21
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by Max Illingworth View Post
    OK, after seeing the discussion I had to see what all the fuss was about, so I read the excerpts, and the immediate impression I get is of a promising idea (turning deep computer understanding into explained general principles) executed unevenly. As a playing model, trying to keep loads of values in your head just doesn't work. In fact, for the endgame, your play might be just as good whether you know the objective assessment or not. As for the principles, the list of numbers for some principles feels more confusing than helpful - it would be clearer to express the principle as e.g. 'The closer the pawn to the centre, the more valuable it is in the middlegame'.

    On the other hand, the excerpt on imbalances was executed well, with positions clearly indicating what makes the pieces clearly better, equivalent or worse than the queen. Of course, it could be expressed more succintly by 'the more stable the position and pieces, the better they perform against the queen', but all in all a good effort for the purposes of positional evaluation. After all, humans are more likely to remember these position images and the understanding behind them than a set of numbers (we don't think like silicon computers)!

    In the past I had wondered how to express the idea of structural flexibility in chess and I think what the author was trying (but failed) to say is that the flexibility of the pawn structure is determined by how easily the pawns can move without creating exploitable weaknesses in the formation. For instance, if I have pawns on d4 and e4, I can play e5 or d5 with the support of the other pawn, but I leave the remaining central square on the fifth rank open to occupation. But with pawns on f4/e4/d4, I could play d5 and still have the e5 square covered by my pawns. Unfortunately the system in the book seems to not appreciate the value of space, especially in positions with several minor pieces each on the board. The concept of a space disadvantage is a noteworthy one but not in the examples used.

    I noticed that there seemed to be a reward in the evaluation for a pawn defended twice (such as d4/e3/c3). There would be some logic to that when the opponent opts for a kingside fianchetto, but just as it's hard to consider the piece harmony without considering the pawn structure, the pawns shouldn't be taken completely in isolation - if White was missing a light-squared bishop in that c3/d4/e3 structure, it would be easy to imagine problems occurring on that colour complex.

    The permanent outposts section examples were appropriate, though it could be expressed more succintly by stating that the outpost becomes more valuable based on the piece's control of the opponent's half of the board and overall mobility (thus covering the point that a 6th rank outpost may prove stronger than a 7th or 8th rank outpost). The definition of semi-outpost used is not the conventional one, but I think it shows a useful idea that wasn't explained - a piece's value is determined not just by its mobility but also its security - how easily can it be attacked, particularly by a pawn in the case of strategic positions?

    I suppose the main difficulty such a book has in terms of sales is that club players are unlikely to draw these conclusions from reading the book, while those able to will already understand most of the concepts.

    Anyway, the author is welcome to give his thoughts on my interpretation of his concepts.
    thank you very much for the indepth reading of the available excerpts, Mr. Illingworth!

    that is the way I like things handled, after that a meaningful discussion might arise.

    your notes are mostly true...., provided that one has not read the whole book.

    just briefly on your specific remarks:

    - advanced pawns, well all pawn features have their psqt attached, but most of them are not visible from the limited excerpts; when you read those psqts, the
    evaluation will make much more sense

    - minor outposts, similarly, you read just an excerpt about permanent minor outposts, but the book also covers in detail general outposts, where 6th rank gets more than 5th,
    5th more than 4th, etc.; the permanent minor outposts section is just a specification following the general definition

    - twice defended pawn, well, do you know that this pawn feature of mine, already present in a past work of mine from the year 2012, under the name apex pawn,
    hs laready passed as a successful Stockfish patch and has been incorporated into Stockfish code? you can still find it into the code under 'apex bonus' for connected pawns.
    I guess this speaks more of its value than any other human assessment. too few evaluation patches actually do pass Stockfish tests, and they have to almost always be
    very sound positional terms

    - similarly with imbalances, I have patches within Stockfish code, based on my ideas

    - similarly with storming pawns evaluation, I have several such patches integrated into Stockfish code, but the storming pawns section is not visible in the
    excerpts, it is in the King safety section

    - I have successful Stockfish patches, based on my ideas on doubled pawns, low mobility pieces, other connected pawn features, etc.

    as said, for the past 5 years I have been doing chess/computer chess 16 hours per day, so I know what I am talking about.

    thanks again for the positive approach!

  7. #22
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by road runner View Post
    hello road runner, nice to meet you!
    I see no contradiction in my above statements.

    12 years a whole lot of time, if you add some 50 elo per year due to intense work on chess/preparation,
    then 12*50=full 600 elo.

    2200 + 600= 2800 elo, so fully feasible, I would think.

    anyway, that is the truth I am stating, as well as about the quality of my book, you are missing the chance to read the greatest chess book ever written
    first hand, but that is only your problem, I on my part am happy I have been able to provide for some fun among forum members.

  8. #23
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,805
    Quote Originally Posted by LyudmilTsvetkov View Post
    hello road runner, nice to meet you!
    I see no contradiction in my above statements.

    12 years a whole lot of time, if you add some 50 elo per year due to intense work on chess/preparation,
    then 12*50=full 600 elo.

    2200 + 600= 2800 elo, so fully feasible, I would think.

    anyway, that is the truth I am stating, as well as about the quality of my book, you are missing the chance to read the greatest chess book ever written
    first hand, but that is only your problem, I on my part am happy I have been able to provide for some fun among forum members.
    Mr, Tsvetkov...are you saying you are 2700 rated strength right now as you know everything in your book, if yes - are you open to match challenges? If you are based in Bulgaria shall I arrange a face to face over the board match between you and a friend of mine - A Bulgarian GM?
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  9. #24
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    934
    Quote Originally Posted by LyudmilTsvetkov View Post
    hello road runner, nice to meet you!
    I see no contradiction in my above statements.

    12 years a whole lot of time, if you add some 50 elo per year due to intense work on chess/preparation,
    then 12*50=full 600 elo.

    2200 + 600= 2800 elo, so fully feasible, I would think.

    anyway, that is the truth I am stating, as well as about the quality of my book, you are missing the chance to read the greatest chess book ever written
    first hand, but that is only your problem, I on my part am happy I have been able to provide for some fun among forum members.
    Just think, after another 4 years intense study our friend will break the 3000 rating barrier and put even poor Magnus to shame.
    Still searching for Bobby Fischer....
    and fighting against those humourless bureaucrats who are forever lost in the minutiae.

  10. #25
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    Mr, Tsvetkov...are you saying you are 2700 rated strength right now as you know everything in your book, if yes - are you open to match challenges? If you are based in Bulgaria shall I arrange a face to face over the board match between you and a friend of mine - A Bulgarian GM?
    Well, Mr Tsvetkov is not only a great author but is clearly a formidable player as well. I certainly hope that he can be tempted into a return to competitive chess.
    Southern Suburbs Chess Club (Perth)
    www.southernsuburbschessclub.org.au

  11. #26
    CC Grandmaster road runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    on the skin of the pale blue dot
    Posts
    12,490
    Quote Originally Posted by LyudmilTsvetkov View Post
    hello road runner, nice to meet you!
    I see no contradiction in my above statements.

    12 years a whole lot of time, if you add some 50 elo per year due to intense work on chess/preparation,
    then 12*50=full 600 elo.

    2200 + 600= 2800 elo, so fully feasible, I would think.

    anyway, that is the truth I am stating, as well as about the quality of my book, you are missing the chance to read the greatest chess book ever written
    first hand, but that is only your problem, I on my part am happy I have been able to provide for some fun among forum members.
    The thing about ratings is, it's not a reflection of your ideas/understanding, it's a reflection of your results. So if you're a 2200 player who studies a lot and doesn't play, you're still a 2200 player. Sure maybe you understand things that the GMs don't. The chess world is full of people who think they know more than GMs, but just can't seem to produce the results to prove it.

    With regard to your book, happy to buy it on Kindle to check it out - for a reasonable price.
    meep meep

  12. #27
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,805
    Quote Originally Posted by road runner View Post

    With regard to your book, happy to buy it on Kindle to check it out - for a reasonable price.
    LOL. His marketing did work!
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  13. #28
    CC Grandmaster road runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    on the skin of the pale blue dot
    Posts
    12,490
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    LOL. His marketing did work!
    Only if you count unqualified lead as a sale.
    meep meep

  14. #29
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    Mr, Tsvetkov...are you saying you are 2700 rated strength right now as you know everything in your book, if yes - are you open to match challenges? If you are based in Bulgaria shall I arrange a face to face over the board match between you and a friend of mine - A Bulgarian GM?
    I am open to all kinds of challenges, though I am more concentrated on my scientific work now.

  15. #30
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by road runner View Post
    The thing about ratings is, it's not a reflection of your ideas/understanding, it's a reflection of your results. So if you're a 2200 player who studies a lot and doesn't play, you're still a 2200 player. Sure maybe you understand things that the GMs don't. The chess world is full of people who think they know more than GMs, but just can't seem to produce the results to prove it.

    With regard to your book, happy to buy it on Kindle to check it out - for a reasonable price.
    if I go to play now, I will easily pass 2500, no effort on my part at all, and spending half the time of my opponents.
    for higher ratings, it takes effort and concentration.

    if you think 9 dollars is a high price for 290 pages large format and over 500 diagrams within, as well as featuring 5 times more chess knowledge terms any other
    book has presented, then you might easily skip the buy.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Gnostic Christian Mystery School Secret Truth #1.
    By Gnostic Bishop in forum Religion and Science
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 24-09-2014, 12:03 AM
  2. ACF - A secret society?
    By Brian_Jones in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 148
    Last Post: 15-01-2008, 04:23 PM
  3. Obesity Secret Ignored
    By Axiom in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 26-11-2007, 08:32 PM
  4. Secret Men's Business
    By antichrist in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-07-2005, 05:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •