Computer Tactics leading to Positional Chess?

Originally posted by Eladar
Chris,

The topic of the thread is supposed to be about the influence of modern chess super computer programs on tournament chess.

Computers allow elite players to find patterns in looking at game after game after game. It allows them to find winning positions which they can reach many different ways.

It's a new way for super-GM's to continue learning. They don't have to study openings, and then study middlegames (positions), and then study endgames (tactics), and have that the extent of their training.

Schiller or Silman (I think one of his old articles) mentioned that GMs will cycle through 100's of games looking for patterns, finding the positions that will give them an advantage.

I think this is the computer's current usefulness in preparing for tournament chess.

Originally posted by imbalances
Computers allow elite players to find patterns in looking at game after game after game. It allows them to find winning positions which they can reach many different ways.

It's a new way for super-GM's to continue learning. They don't have to study openings, and then study middlegames (positions), and then study endgames (tactics), and have that the ...[text shortened]... ge.

I think this is the computer's current usefulness in preparing for tournament chess.

Computers definitely allow you to efficiently search through large databases to find similar positions. I'm sure that this is one of the most useful applications of computers for high level players.

I'd think this would be a different application from letting computers calculate lines from a +3000 perspective.

Originally posted by Eladar
Chris,

I don't really play computers. I did for a while, but now I just play against people. When I found out that you could get in trouble using your computer analysis in future games (building a computer generated line of moves) I kind of gave up on that. I was going to compile a huge set of lines for 1.b3 and call it "1.b3 Fritz and me". 😀

The to ...[text shortened]... ction I guess, but I think there is a big difference and is really the only way to go.

So as White do you plan to always fianchetto your Queenside Bishop in preparation for some attack through the center aiming at your opponents Kingside? What off beat opening defense do you have planned if you are Black?

The Instructor

Originally posted by RJHinds
So as White do you plan to always fianchetto your Queenside Bishop in preparation for some attack through the center aiming at your opponents Kingside? What off beat opening defense do you have planned if you are Black?

The Instructor

What do I play?

White I play Nimzo-Larsen and Polar Bear with the black pieces I like to play the Leningrad Dutch, Owens, KID and Qd6 Scandinavian depending on how I feel 😀.

Originally posted by Eladar
What do I play?

White I play Nimzo-Larsen and Polar Bear with the black pieces I like to play the Leningrad Dutch, Owens, KID and Qd6 Scandinavian depending on how I feel 😀.

Of those openings, I am only familiar with the KID and Center-counter as I learned to call the Scandinavian. But didn't you say you were preparing to play 1. b2 as White? Does that mean you have never tried it yet? Okay, I know the Nimzo-Larsen by the older name of Queen's Fianchetto Opening.

The Instructor

Originally posted by RJHinds
Of those openings, I am only familiar with the KID and Center-counter as I learned to call the Scandinavian. But didn't you say you were preparing to play 1. b2 as White? Does that mean you have never tried it yet? Okay, I know the Nimzo-Larsen by the older name of Queen's Fianchetto Opening.

The Instructor

I tried playing 1.b2 one time, but that game lasted forever. 😀

Yes, I've played 1.b3 many times, but I said that I was told that my plan to create a huge computer analyzed opening to ending move list was actually illegal for places like RHP. I guess it would still be considered using a computer, even if all the moves were already written down. lol

Originally posted by Eladar
I tried playing 1.b2 one time, but that game lasted forever. 😀

Yes, I've played 1.b3 many times, but I said that I was told that my plan to create a huge computer analyzed opening to ending move list was actually illegal for places like RHP. I guess it would still be considered using a computer, even if all the moves were already written down. lol

Yeah, I meant to type 1. b3. Maybe blunders like that is one reason I am not doing too good OTB, since I have returned to chess. I think the new players of today, in each class, are better than I remember those that I used to play in the 1970's. It may be due to the practice they get with the strong chess computers of today and the ability to get extra practice on the internet chess sites. But maybe I have just gotten worse in my old age. Another thing I have noticed is that the time allowed to play a regular rated game at the chess clubs of today are shorter than when I played years ago.

The Instructor

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Until that happy day keep an eye on all unprotected pieces and check all checks.
In other words, just because the tactics in the top notch games are rarely
seen outside of the notes it does not mean they won't appear in our games.
At our level the two move trick is the winner.

This works. And it will fit on a post-it note. I tried, and it works for me. As long as I remember to read it.

Originally posted by Paul Leggett
This works. And it will fit on a post-it note. I tried, and it works for me. As long as I remember to read it.

But most of us want to play above our level. That is why we use the analyze board to see how the position msy look more than two moves ahead.

The Instructor