Heroes of Might and Magic Community
visiting hero! Register | Today's Posts | Games | Search! | FAQ/Rules | AvatarList | MemberList | Profile


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
New Server | HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info forum | HOMM4: info forum | HOMM5: info forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Tavern of the Rising Sun > Thread: Reflections on chess
Thread: Reflections on chess This thread is 3 pages long: 1 2 3 · NEXT»
Galaad
Galaad

Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
posted August 17, 2016 12:54 AM bonus applied by OmegaDestroyer on 25 Apr 2017.
Edited by Galaad at 00:56, 17 Aug 2016.

Reflections on chess

It is often hard to picture what a chess game represents. The beginner is usually doomed to cogitate already at the move of one piece. Here are for who is interested some thoughts to give more perspective of the understanding of a game:

We could distinguish three phases in chess: the Opening, the Middle-game and the Endgame.

The Opening

In this phase the number of pieces is paradoxically preventing their activity. The Opening theory will involve into finding a capacity to make the pieces breathe according to the opponent's choice in order to mobilize them. A crucial aspect is the coordination of pieces and the interactions we will create between them that will allow the combinations. So there is some great theories of openings that are offered, like the centralization, or the gambits, the latter consisting in sacrificing some material in order to develop our pieces on the principle to create a dynamic that will allow, in the long term, to take the material back (Marshall gambit, Evans gambit, Benko gambit, King's gambit, Queen's gambit).


Marshall gambit

Here we enter into a key aspect: the complex and narrowed connection between space and time.
Galvanizing means getting more space (often by sacrificing pieces/material) but the pieces coordination being stronger we will be able to take them back by keeping the activity. Which means there is some sort of precise timing, being a step ahead, and the opponent will suffer the moves. Of course a grand strategist can put his opponent out of breath in a shallow activity (Carlsen) and with moves of great prophylaxis will foil combinations while keeping solid, and by this mean counter-attack. The Opening theory (assisted by computers nowadays) can lead to sequences (15 to 20 moves) with multiple trees related to the chosen lines (Spanish, Grünfeld, gambits, Italians, Sicilians, Scottish, etc)

   
Grünfeld                                                                                                                                                                            Sicilian

The opening's ending often leads the players to a position where its depth makes any move completely incalculable. Even the best machines, in front of these positions stay bewildered.
Playing a move -comprehending what it implies- even for a world's champion can turn out to be impossible.

The Middle game

The second phase of the game characterizes itself by combinations, similar to clockmaking.
We can find this particularly in diagrams where the key consists into finding the order of the moves. We have the intuition that there is an exit in the position without being certain until the equation gets resolved.



The very good players feed themselves of diagrams everyday as a training to develop their tactics. The pleasure to solve equations can be comparable to a scientist making a breakthrough in his research. What once was confused and dark suddenly becomes clear and limpid, and is orgasmic.



In accordance to the personalities, the players will develop distinct styles. The cautious one avoiding risks staying in a controlled space will develop qualities of a positional player, others on the contrary, being more belligerent, will find pleasure in breaking the enemy's defenses and as such will choose gambits and other ultra-tactical lines.



Except that, the game's complexity will attain its peak during the last phase, the endgame.

The Endgame

The very strong players will always foresee the endgame since the start. The structure of the pawns determines the Endgame's frame. And the belligerents often loose their chance of winning at that stage, as they play aggressively without taking full consideration of long-term consequences. The great strategist as such will always be fully aware of the consequences of his choices. And at last arrives the Endgame's theory.
An important matter is to understand that as the board becomes more empty, the remaining pieces's influence is important, comparable to the sun's beam in a mountain, we can be warm even when there is snow. As such the power of influence the pieces have is much more essential and offers combinations much richer and more complex than in the Middle game. The value of the pieces changes and the King takes all its room, the pawns are now potential Queens and thus a totally different game is taking shape.


Quote:
55.Rc3! And after 55...Ta8, « positioning his Tower behind the pass pawn » - as are advising all the Endgame's books - by 56.Ta4. Do not believe the Bulgare ignored this principle, and we think in a more mundane way that he considered his position as winning in many ways. The game could have went on with 56...Ta6 to block the pawn. 57.Rb4 Rc6 58.Ta1 Rb7 59.Th1 Rc6 60.Rb5 Tc2 61.Th7+ Rb8 62.a6 Rb2+ 63.Rc6 Ta2 64.a7+, second diagram, where the pawn in a7 is impossible to take. And after 64...Ra8 65.Rd6 Ta6+ 66.Re5 Tb6 67.Te7 Tb4 68.Txe6 Rxa7 69.Tc6 Rb7 70.Tc1, with easy gain, as in the third diagram. The black King is cut, all is left to imagine the position with a white King in e8 and the pawn in e7; the white Tower will do « the bridge » in c4 and the white King will arrive in e5 doing zigzags to escape the checks from the black Tower, before positioning the white Tower in e4 to stop the last check, followed by the pawn's promotion in e7 in e8.

____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted August 17, 2016 02:07 AM

Chess thread
____________
you guys are after some sort of systemized system - tsar

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Galaad
Galaad

Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
posted August 17, 2016 10:10 AM

Thanks. There is of course many analysis to do but the meaning of my thread is to give a global vision of the three phases a chess game has.

What do you think about it?
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted August 17, 2016 10:45 AM

Well, I am an amateur player, I don't think like "I'm in the opening phase of the game at the moment." I played with a few pros who had scored in tournaments, about 80 percent of the time, they beat me. They say my biggest flaw is concentrating too much on my offensive or if I can't come up with one, this time going defensive in a very linear manner, instead of protecting zones. That lead me to focus more on having control over the central zone and it really turned me into a relatively better player. If I manage to survive until the phase where there are less pieces, I usually have a better chance at beating a pro, especially if his Knights are gone. Bishops, even Rooks I can handle, Knights seem to sneak out on you in the worst way.

In my mid twenties, when I was around 25 or something, I had this house and a lot of my friends were constantly staying over. None of us had money to do anything, so we used to spend the nights playing chess, wagering for the last cigarette and snow like that. It was everything chess wasn't supposed to be, we used to drink like crazy while playing, constantly made stupid jokes about forthcoming moves, kept no track of time... I think the amount of games we played still added up to something but it kind of developed a game style in me where I can make the most stupid move right after a very profound one.
____________
you guys are after some sort of systemized system - tsar

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Maurice
Maurice

Hero of Order
Part of the furniture
posted August 17, 2016 11:30 AM

Chess is racist in nature. White always gets to move first and what about white pieces capturing black pieces and vice-versa?


____________
The last Reasonable Steward of Good Game Design and a Responsible Hero of HC. - Verriker

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Salamandre
Salamandre


Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
posted August 17, 2016 11:43 AM
Edited by Salamandre at 11:53, 17 Aug 2016.

Then the piano is the king of racists, there are more white keys than black, we call black keys accidents, then our fingers are more likely to slip on black keys, as they are thinner and treacherous.

And btw, I can also get a stalemate with any pro once only the kings are left, so artu stop bragging.
____________
All my Era II mods

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted August 17, 2016 11:57 AM

I'll check-mate you and a pro, once the knights are gone but both rooks and bishops are on the board. Let's bring it on, Schubert,
____________
you guys are after some sort of systemized system - tsar

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Salamandre
Salamandre


Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
posted August 17, 2016 11:59 AM

The pro, you wish blonde or brunette? Because if no longer knights, some one must ride it.
____________
All my Era II mods

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted August 17, 2016 12:02 PM




 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Salamandre
Salamandre


Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
posted August 17, 2016 12:05 PM

I am afraid a further allusion at your fisting obvious preferences will end by moving this thread to VW so I will retire. From thread I mean.  
____________
All my Era II mods

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Galaad
Galaad

Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
posted August 17, 2016 12:39 PM
Edited by Galaad at 19:14, 17 Aug 2016.

Maurice said:
Chess is racist in nature. White always gets to move first and what about white pieces capturing black pieces and vice-versa?




Before the creation, the unity broke up, the duality is the unstable equilibrium in which the existence is (night and day etc), all is duality in this world, only the measure and balance allows us to rediscover the intuition of a lost unity.
Chess, in the feminine/masculine, in the black/white, are only placing into the abyss this established fact, the encounter giving the opportunity to create some harmony in a moment of time.



Artu said:
Well, I am an amateur player, I don't think like "I'm in the opening phase of the game at the moment." I played with a few pros who had scored in tournaments, about 80 percent of the time, they beat me. They say my biggest flaw is concentrating too much on my offensive or if I can't come up with one, this time going defensive in a very linear manner, instead of protecting zones. That lead me to focus more on having control over the central zone and it really turned me into a relatively better player. If I manage to survive until the phase where there are less pieces, I usually have a better chance at beating a pro, especially if his Knights are gone. Bishops, even Rooks I can handle, Knights seem to sneak out on you in the worst way.


On one side we can improve the combination phase (Middle-game), making us understand that attacking with two pieces does not suffice, the sacrifice of deviation, of attraction, pinning the pieces, the forks, all these resources combined permit magnificent solutions. The young player attacks with two pieces against a fortress. It goes without saying that a bad move that has not been refuted can become a good move, but against a decent player the eager beginner will get himself atomized.
A principle to end development of the opening phase is indeed to centralize by over-protecting the weaknesses, until the Rooks are mobilized on the open or half-open files. From this point the trades will be of a rare complexity.

An interesting thing for the beginner to do is to play with only pawns, Kings and, in example Bishops, or Knights, to get used into comprehending the importance of the pawns structure and familiarize himself with the Endgame.
Thereafter, the choice of openings will be done in the background being aware of the endgame. As in oil paints, the painter must go through the shadows first, getting to light subsequently.
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
OhforfSake
OhforfSake


Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
posted August 17, 2016 02:16 PM

I too have been taught to look at the game in those 3 stages (opening, middle game and end game).

Each part is fascinating in its own right.. though I tend to find opening the least fascinating, but perhaps also the most punishing part.

Do you play much Galaad? Like I told you before, we're very accepting of your quirks and fetishes no matter how disgusting, have you played in a club and if so what are you rated at?

I guess the part I like the best is the middle game, not as much to find a plan to finish the game, but more to create a position that will result in a win in the end-game.. sometimes I do find chess to be a bit too balanced a game though, if you e.g. look at computer evaluations for equal positions it'll often suggest a line of moves that aimlessly goes no-where and simply waits for the opponent to make a mistake or the position to reach a point where the computer finds something that works. Also, middle game is in my opinion the part where computers truly outshine humans (e.g. the 5 Hydra vs. M. Adams games).

If you e.g. use an end-game tablebase you can see how much better even the strongest computers can be at end-games.. positions that are perhaps won in 45 moves the strongest computers will accidentally draw after 10 moves or so. I think I once looked at such a position with 2 queens, 2 kings and one side having 2 pawns while the other zero.

Speaking of computers, something that annoys me is whenever I see a program about A.I. they always mention Kasparov's 3.5-2.5 loss in 97 as the point computers beat man at chess, but if one looks at rating estimations at the time (Deep Blue I guess wasn't given many games to play, sadly) it's actually rated lower than the best players today and lower than Kasparov at the time.. I think it's an issue if you get to play rematch after rematch against the one you try to defeat, once you win there are no more games because now you've won, disregarding all previous losses as irrelevant. I'm sure if I got to play hundreds or thousands of games against even the best computers, at some time, even if only because of hardware failure (Kasparov was not in a good period at the time of those games), I'd win at least one, then I'd retire declare myself champion, disregarding the previous 3500 lost matches.

However there's no doubt that computers today are truly better, because fortunately while IBM doesn't seem to have kept on developing on Deep Blue, others were inspired and today the best computers are rated at ~500-600 rating points above the best humans, meaning the best human player is expected to score ~4-7% or to say in 20 games lose 18 and play 2 draws or lose 19 and win 1 game. There are however very few games of computers versus the very best players, so again don't just assume this to be the absolute truth, but take into consideration that computers are aiding the best players in their preparation which does show they have a lot to offer.

Regarding sacrificial games to gain tempo, like you I like that play style, though against the best players in my opinion it's perhaps only an attempt to play to a draw, there's this epic battle between two machines, each at the peak rating level  for 2011, perhaps ~200 behind todays machines and beyond that of any human, where epic and non-understandable things (for me at least) happens: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1713451

____________
Living time backwards

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Galaad
Galaad

Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
posted August 17, 2016 04:00 PM

Indeed nowadays machines are of great help to humans preparation for tournaments, but sterilizes ideas IMO. Probably 90% if not more of the best players play moves from the best computers and the psychological tensions or the external pressure often swings the games from one side or another and summon mistakes. The computers combinatorial faculty is extraordinary, maybe there is yet still a few margins where certain positions are "badly" evaluated by the computers, which could leave some hope of possible victory.
Today's young players drama is they constantly refer themselves to the machines thus do not take time to elaborate plans anymore. Kasparov was aggrieved of this, at the analysis with the young players. Kasparov has greatly contributed to the amelioration of softwares back in the day by searching to comprehend the machine's flaws. What is crazy is that today machines could replace humans in almost all disciplines, men only trying to be on par with them.
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
OhforfSake
OhforfSake


Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
posted August 17, 2016 04:23 PM

Well since you decided to take this discussion towards game AI and not ultimately extreme perverted ideas and fantasies, I'll start off with this comic:

A computer have however recently won over a very strong Go player in a 5 match game, though I haven't heard of further games.

There are still positions where a chess engine is worse than man, some silent positions that resulted from extremely boring and strange play, but a more interesting example is the game of The World vs. De Firmian.

Notice the final position, my engine (and I'm sure de Firmian's engine did so as well) says it's a draw, but for a human it can quickly become obvious that black has won.

For those who do not see why, it's because white can never activate his king, giving black a huge advantage and basically the game. I remember when I first saw the game I tried then to play as black versus the machine, and guess what, it found a trap and it ended a draw, next time knowing of the trap I managed to win, and since it was the only trap the machine ever found (can't remember exactly what the trap was at present moment), I could consistently win over the machine with black pieces from this position despite the computer insisting the game was equal until a couple of more moves had been played.

Also another interesting thing is that if I let the computer hold the black pieces it's quick to move its a-pawn forward again and again, throwing away the win.
____________
Living time backwards

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Galaad
Galaad

Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
posted August 17, 2016 06:09 PM
Edited by Galaad at 18:12, 17 Aug 2016.

But is you who started the subject about machines and I agreed with what you said, I also said that it can happen that machines don't evaluate properly and now you're telling it to me with good example, I don't understand where you're getting at.

OhforfSake said:
and not ultimately extreme perverted ideas and fantasies


Lol what are you on about?
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
yogi
yogi


Promising
Famous Hero
of picnics
posted August 17, 2016 07:15 PM

we should play Calvinball
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Ghost
Ghost


Supreme Hero
Therefore I am
posted August 17, 2016 07:53 PM

Collect move books, I agree with Yoga, and play more Halloween Gambit, take 50 moves, and 50 trees, even if match book is 20 move length

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
yogi
yogi


Promising
Famous Hero
of picnics
posted August 17, 2016 08:13 PM

wtf, Ghost wins Calvinball on the first turn
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Gryphs
Gryphs


Supreme Hero
The Clever Title
posted August 17, 2016 08:22 PM

Nope, rule change whoever posts right here wins. Checkmate.
____________
"Don't resist the force. Redirect it. Water over rock."-blizzardboy

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
yogi
yogi


Promising
Famous Hero
of picnics
posted August 17, 2016 08:33 PM

G.R.O.S.S.

____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This thread is 3 pages long: 1 2 3 · NEXT»
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.0831 seconds