Originally posted by Dragon Fire(assuming this is not a joke), it's to make black a pawn down and all pieces remain in the starting position. it's the only way to tell the pgn viewer it's an odds game.
This certainly does not seem a GM level game.
What was the point of the first half dozen moves?
Originally posted by Dragon FireI was wondering that. It looks as if the first six moves were just a device for black to give pawn odds before starting the real game. Why not just set up the board minus a black pawn?
This certainly does not seem a GM level game.
What was the point of the first half dozen moves?
Originally posted by KeplerIt's not possible to do that neither in here or online broadcasting sites, there's no usual way to explain the odds to a pgn utility. this is the cleanest way.
I was wondering that. It looks as if the first six moves were just a device for black to give pawn odds before starting the real game. Why not just set up the board minus a black pawn?
Originally posted by Keplerof course not. it's rybka who gave the odds. I would bet on my house a GM could not be able to win a single game giving Rybka pawn odds.
Ah, I am failing to keep up as usual. It doesn't actually say that Rybka gave the GM pawn odds. Maybe the it was the other way about?
Originally posted by diskamylI didn't say it was a good idea and the GM did lose. Sometimes human pride causes humans to do stupid things. "I could beat any engine, in fact I'd give pawn odds" is just the sort of thing a human under the influence drink, drugs or pride is quite likely to say! I suspect it is very likely Rybka was giving the odds but one should never discount human stupidity.
of course not. it's rybka who gave the odds. I would bet on my house a GM could not be able to win a single game giving Rybka pawn odds.
This thread is turning into a an advert for a chess engine.
Please no more examples. (are you on a commision?).
If you want to improve your chess v humans OTB then do it
the same way all the great players did before computers.
If you want to improve playing against computers then study
on your own, asking no questions and become a rote player.
Compare it to someone who sits all day and plays SOCCER PRO.
And achieves a 'high level.'
They then go out into a field and find they cannot even kick a ball.
The same with computer players (easy to spot).
You have to learn how to play chess against a human.
It's a different ball game all together.
How easy is it to spot a computer player?
They miss pieces en prise and one move tricks. Simply becuase
they have never seen them before. Even the weakest computers
have stopped leaving pieces hanging.
In short, they do not know how to punish human errors and if you
do not punish a bad move right away...it will turn out to be a good move.
But if you enjoy what you are you doing - carry on.
But please do not kid yourself you are learning anything about
the game from an elctronic calculater.
And please do no try to convince others this is the way.
Originally posted by greenpawn34If you want to improve your chess v humans OTB then do it
This thread is turning into a an advert for a chess engine.
Please no more examples. (are you on a commision?).
If you want to improve your chess v humans OTB then do it
the same way all the great players did before computers.
If you want to improve playing against computers then study
on your own, asking no questions and become a rote player. me from an elctronic calculater.
And please do no try to convince others this is the way.
the same way all the great players did before computers.
I would say that your opinion is old-fashioned. With all their drawbacks engines are very useful to improve. On the other hand - you must not believe engine "on word" without using your own brains.
P.S. Anyway - aim to improve your play is not justification for cheating.
Originally posted by greenpawn34wow that's probably how people thought about computers back in 1930s.
This thread is turning into a an advert for a chess engine.
Please no more examples. (are you on a commision?).
(...)
But please do not kid yourself you are learning anything about
the game from an elctronic calculater.
and accusing me of advertising for a chess engine? it's cheap. grow up.
quote:
"wow that's probably how people thought about computers back in 1930s."
So if it's not a commision then it must be love.
You must get out more.
I'm not a techno-phobe - I was in at the start and my job is
devolping software.
Infact....
In the 80's I was asked by Texas Instruments to play 7 of their
Chess computers in a simul. I won all 7.
My pic and a blurb appeared in PC World for a few years.
The result against the things was somehow never shown.
TORCH:
I agree Torch they can and do help - but do you not agree
playing a human is a far cry from playing a box.
Box players need to see human blunders and feel their opponents
'presence'. If you don't know what this means it's something
that good strong players can transmit over the board.
Fischer, Tal and Kasparov had it in spades.
All strong players have it.
One of my jobs is to enter games into a DB the standard has dropped
and the amount of times a player leaves a piece hanging and
his/her opponent does not see it is rising fast.
This is box player's syndrone and it's spreading.
I fear for the future of the game. I think OTB chess will eventually
die and we will be left with pasty-faced individuals who never go out
playing games over the net and sleeping with their engines.
Originally posted by greenpawn34I agree that to improve your play you should study books and GM games also. But it does not mean that analysing and playing with engine is useless.
quote:
"wow that's probably how people thought about computers back in 1930s."
So if it's not a commision then it must be love.
You must get out more.
I'm not a techno-phobe - I was in at the start and my job is
devolping software.
Infact....
In the 80's I was asked by Texas Instruments to play 7 of their
Chess computers in a simul. I ...[text shortened]... iduals who never go out
playing games over the net and sleeping with their engines.
Originally posted by diskamylI'm not sure what you mean by 'usual', but just in case you mean there isn't a way, there certainly is. you just put in the pgn file a FEN tag with the starting position, and a SetUp tag with a string "1". maybe you knew this already, but I thought I'd make it sure...
...there's no usual way to explain the odds to a pgn utility.
in this case, like this:
[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "?"]
[Black "?"]
[Result "0-1"]
[PlyCount "60"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/ppp1pppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 7"]
[SetUp "1"]
very handy for archiving games from thematic tournaments.
now lets see if it works with the rhp viewer (I'll input only the first move 1.Nf3 because I feel lazy):
edit: looks like the rhp viewer ignores the setup fen. I'll send feedback.
Originally posted by wormwoodoh I didn't know you could start from a FEN like that. thanks.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'usual', but just in case you mean there isn't a way, there certainly is. you just put in the pgn file a FEN tag with the starting position, and a SetUp tag with a string "1". maybe you knew this already, but I thought I'd make it sure...
in this case, like this:
[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
...[text shortened]... ewer ignores the setup fen. I'll send feedback.