Chess Match Thread
- Thread starter babe
- Start date
Nf6.
Ecta is probably in the wee hours of a normal night right now. . . . . sleeping like any sane man would do. . . .
I've got time to try to learn how to do those images of the game. . . .
[/IMG]
1. e4 d6
2. d4 e6
3. Nc3 Nf6
4. Nf3
Wow, Siro-Log game has developed already.
Jonah
Well-Known Member
It is not boring. It's a good, well-played game full of possibilities. The point is not the speed you would prefer, you are not playing! Plus, you can pop in and out of the thread in seconds, then maybe it will be more your speed and not be so boring for you. For myself, I like to spend more time and think of what I would do if it were my turn to play.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
Did anyone end up mating in this thread?
That would be something to check out, in sort of an ambulance, fire engine chasing kind of way.
That would be something to check out, in sort of an ambulance, fire engine chasing kind of way.
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Fwiw I haven't spent much more than 5 minutes evaluating before making my move. Really the line siro and I have going is pretty well defined with fairly rote moves following the logic of development up to this point. I anticipate done deviations coming up but so far after about the 4th move it's been pretty much what I expected.
Jonah
Well-Known Member
I don't know the openings well at all so I'm not familiar with this line, but it's seems to me this is an important point in the game with several very different ways to play for black.
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
The last move by siro was really the first point where the absolute best move by both sides wasn't kind of a given. He could have castled (more passive, but with development in mind) or made the knight move he did (a bit more aggressive, and the best move available, imo) or he could have developed his king bishop to bring more pressure to bear on my king side (much more aggressive, but it is much harder right now to know the best spot for that bishop). All in all the knight move was probably the best move, but this was really the first point where there were several viable moves with no clear "best move".
It didn't. I am at work and don't have time to put the diagram together. If someone could update for us here is my move:
1. d4 Nf6
2. Nc3 e6
3. e4 Bb4
4. e5 Nd5
5. Qg4 g6
6. Bg5 f6
7. e5xf6 Nxf6
8. Qh4 0-0
9. Nf3 Nc6[/QUOTE]
I don't think castling in that situation would have been prudent. If I were in your shoes, I would exchange bishop on b4 for Nc3 in response to 0-0-0. That would break up the pawn structure protecting the king, and force a double pawn on the c file. That is too high a price just to develop the rook 2 moves early.
Well, there is only two of us. Why do you suspect computer analysis? I don't see anything unusual about what has transpired thus far.
Maybe I spoke too early, but I said it mostly for trolling anyway. It was like %80 trolling/joking and %20 serious. Still, I should have waited for the games to be ended. Then I could analyze them better anyway.
Lol, for the %20 serious part, not that I don't trust you guys or I believe that you guys couldn't be strong players. If anything, you(Siro, Log, babe etc) are the ones whom I would expect to be strong chess players. It's just that babe's this thread made me go at chess again after years and I've spent quite some time in these two days on the internet to get my knowledge about chess up to date. In the mean time, I have downloaded several chess engines and chess games and have been playing around with them for fun. Anyway, there were a few moves from both of you that the engines were particularly agreed on. (I will reveal them later after I have a better opinion) But like I said, I spoke prematurely, I should wait for the games to end, and even a few parties to be played then I could easily have a much better opinion about it.
As I mentioned earlier, I played chess in high school years and played for the school team. I was around 1750 elo at my peek and I even finished 8th overall in the city at my age category(U16) in a big chess tournament(that means my city sucked at chess). However, after as I got in more competitive environment, my elo diminished to 1650 and before I had the chance to improve it again I had to quit playing because of the university entry exams. Anyway, what I'm trying to tell is, you could somewhat determine the strength of a player from his games using the chess engines etc, if a casual player uses winboards or any modern chess engines or games etc to cheat you could easily tell apart it by analyzing the games and comparing the results what type of a player he/she is. What would you expect from a casual chess player is a strength rating of 1300-1800 or 2000 at the most. Semi professional players such as players who attend to local tournaments etc can often up to 2100-2250 easily. Any ratings of 2250-2300+ are indicators of a full time chess hobby/profession or at least semi professional chess careers. So when a casual player gets help from the modern chess programs that can easily play over 2600-2800+, it will be just so easy to detect it.
Btw, let me state again that I'm not making any assumptions about your smartness/intelligence or chess strength. You guys could be avid chess players with 2200+ ratings for all I know. I'm sure you guys are certainly capable of that. But it's just the fact that chess is not a game that you can have those kind of ratings with purely intelligence. Casual players are and will always be severely limited in the game of chess no matter how smart or intelligent they could be(unless they started chess at very young ages and played most of their childhood). Because chess is a freaking mind sport that requires countless hours and immense hard work consistently for very long years to be a master at.
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
I am not surprised that we would agree with a chess engine. If you are a solid player you have a good understanding of the logic of the moves, basic strategy (such as development, center control, piece strength, pins, forks, etc.), and some situations almost force moves when you have a good understanding of the game. That is why I pointed out that up to a certain point I had a pretty good idea where it would go, and I called our game at least 4 moves ahead ever since siro played e4, which was the deviation from any kind of mainline developing. As soon as I pinned his knight with my bishop (which was taking a risk on my part, I had several other moves available but I wanted to rattle the cage, so to speak) then it was pretty clear where it was going at that point. That we both followed the logic of the game was no surprise to me, although I would be curious to know what your game engine was telling you we should do. I always learn when I play.
And I have talked a bit about my past in chess and had my own days playing rated tournaments and such. I started playing at age 5 like babe, and played every chance I got until my mid-20's or nearing 30 or so. I also started the chess club in my high school. Since then I have played on and off at differing levels of competition, and most recently play with the Reno Chess Club, although sporadically. I haven't tried to really analyze my way through a game in a long time, and mostly anymore play pretty casually. But I think when I have the time and can work out the moves and combos I can still be pretty competitive but there is some parts of it that just kind of flow sometimes.
