Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
If so, what engine do you use?
Ever paid a master (or IM, GM) to analyze your games for you? Was it worth it?
|
|
|
Narz, I used to use Fritz after the games were over. I did find some errors that way, which were useful to know about.
|
|
|
You should never use a computer such as Fritz to analyze your games. It is better to go over your game with a strong master in your club. They can explain the ideas in a position.
|
|
|
That's fine if you know a strong player who will give you the time. Not everybody has that luxury and Fritz is very good at finding the tactical blunders that decide the games of most players.
For those who don't have a friendly strong player to analyze with, the best thing to do is to go over the game yourself and try to work out what you did wrong. Then check everything with an engine to see what you're still missing and try to understand why the computer's moves are better.
|
|
|
I haven’t found them to be much use for anything except pointing out tactical errors. In many positions where there are no tactics there are often 2 or 3 moves that are of equal merit from the human perspective. For example I can’t tell the difference between 3 moves evaluated +.25, +.31 and +.35. I wouldn’t trust one to correctly evaluate an ending unless it was using a tablebase in a reduced piece ending. I have a 1.5 million game db so they are useful for opening research. Even so against players over 2000 the average no. of moves before we were out of the db was only 11 moves and it’s even less for under 2000 so it still has its limitations.
|
|
|
| Odie_Spud wrote: For example I can’t tell the difference between 3 moves evaluated +.25, +.31 and +.35. |
Nobody can. However, if one of the moves is half a pawn or so better than the others (or better than the move you played), you should usually be able to work out why the computer's move is better.
|
| 1 2 Next |
