PDA

View Full Version : what's the best full analysis?



qpawn
24-07-2006, 04:34 PM
What is the best way to get Fritz 8 to do a full analysis/annotation of a game?

I have put the same game onto aanalysis on different computers. But a more powerful computer doesn't seem to make that much difference; FRitz makes the same mistakes sometimes giving ?? for moves are actually perfectly fine. For instance I had my opponenet's king exposed and toyed with him/her a bit with a few checks before delivering the killer moves. Fritz gave all my "mark time checks" a ?? which is stupid; I had the position in hand and was about to cash in.

Garvinator
24-07-2006, 08:08 PM
What is the best way to get Fritz 8 to do a full analysis/annotation of a game?

I have put the same game onto aanalysis on different computers. But a more powerful computer doesn't seem to make that much difference; FRitz makes the same mistakes sometimes giving ?? for moves are actually perfectly fine. For instance I had my opponenet's king exposed and toyed with him/her a bit with a few checks before delivering the killer moves. Fritz gave all my "mark time checks" a ?? which is stupid; I had the position in hand and was about to cash in.
The reason it gave you ?? is because you did not choose the option that lead to the win in the smallest number of moves.

qpawn
24-07-2006, 09:35 PM
By that measure Morphy was a patzer for missing numerous quicker wins . For instance in his famoous win over Paulsen in the US congress Morphy missed many quicker mates [pointed out by Bauer and others] after the queen sac.

Garvinator
25-07-2006, 02:34 AM
By that measure Morphy was a patzer for missing numerous quicker wins . For instance in his famoous win over Paulsen in the US congress Morphy missed many quicker mates [pointed out by Bauer and others] after the queen sac.
A computer chess engine is an unthinking analytical tool, all it will tell you is moves 'by the numbers'.

So for a computer, yes it would mark Morphy's moves as ? or ?? as he didnt play the best moves in the position. Speaking dispassionately, it would be right.

Chess engines have 'helped' quite a bit in evaluating the 'past greats' by showing up tactical errors and showing diffferent ideas.

Kevin Bonham
25-07-2006, 06:40 PM
I don't think there's any substitute for using the computer to compose a full game analysis manually and subjectively. If you know how to do it you will make far better and more useful notes than any automatic full game analysis function. In critical positions to get to the truth sometimes you have to be willing to look very deeply, picking key lines to go into in detail (I've often found that once you key in half a dozen more or less forced moves the evaluation will change as more ideas come onto the horizon). Also a good player is far more interested in the difference between 0 and 0.5 than the difference between +4 and +6, so like qpawn mentions, alleged ??s when you have the game totally in hand whatever you do but just happened to miss a faster crush are silly.

I've been meaning to do a more lengthy thread or article on the use and abuse of computers in game analysis sometime.