ChessConquest - official discussion thread

Thank you Solitude and Tallfred for the game analysis. It seems the game was not as brilliant as i thought but more in a way i got away with my opponent playing poor.

Tallfred can you please tell me how to do the analysis in chessmaster as i have a copy of Chessmaster Grandmaster edition. I can import the game but can't seem to get it to analyze it.
 
I've only got Chessmaster 9000 (got it from Good Old Games a while back) so I don't know how Tallfred does it. It does look like he imports the game somehow and goes through the moves manually while the computer is calculating. Don't know though.

I've been playing a lot of games against the computer (Fritz) at various difficulty levels. It's bloody hard. If I play against it at a level of 1600 ELO then I find I can stay ahead up until the endgame but each and every time Fritz will beat me there. I was hoping that I'm a better player than 1600. I know the computer ratings are estimates but how accurate are they?

It's a good way to find your weaknesses though. I've been working on my openings, tactical and positional play for a while now but it seems that my endgame sucks. Badly. :( Should rather work on that for a while.
 
Thank you Solitude and Tallfred for the game analysis. It seems the game was not as brilliant as i thought but more in a way i got away with my opponent playing poor.

Tallfred can you please tell me how to do the analysis in chessmaster as i have a copy of Chessmaster Grandmaster edition. I can import the game but can't seem to get it to analyze it.

You don't have to play well if you help your opponent to play badly :) In this game, your opponent was not able to deal with your threats, and so you won. It's as simple as that.

How I analyze games:
- download the PGN
- Fire up Chessmaster
- Start a game in training mode. Press Cancel if Chessmaster tries to set up opponents and time.
- Choose File... Load (or press Ctrl+L) and point Chessmaster to the PGN
- Select Mentor... Game Analysis
- Enter the amount of time that Chessmaster should consider each move: 200 seconds works well if you leave the computer to think overnight
- Leave Chessmaster whilst it thinks: this can take a long time depending on how long the game is and how much time yiou have allocated per move.
- When Chessmaster has finished, you can look at the annotation window (Look under for it under the Window menu item) to see Chessmaster's analysis at each move.

Tip for free: the annotation at the initial position is Chessmaster's summary of its view of the game. In the case of your game it reads as follows:
Annotations by Chessmaster: Grandmaster Edition Auto-Annotator. 100 seconds per move.

White Black
Book Move 2 2
Leave Book 1 0
CMX Agrees 10 4
CMX Disagrees 1 6
Agreement Pct. 91% 40%
Total Error 2.07 18.13
Relevant Error 2.07 9.40
Missed Mate 0 0
Moved Into Mate 0 0

I am not quite sure of the difference between "Total Error" and "Relevant Error", but this report is still an eloquent summary of Chessmaster's opinion of this game.

Feel free to contact me if you have any further questions at [email protected]
 
I've been playing a lot of games against the computer (Fritz) at various difficulty levels. It's bloody hard. If I play against it at a level of 1600 ELO then I find I can stay ahead up until the endgame but each and every time Fritz will beat me there. I was hoping that I'm a better player than 1600. I know the computer ratings are estimates but how accurate are they?

It's a good way to find your weaknesses though. I've been working on my openings, tactical and positional play for a while now but it seems that my endgame sucks. Badly. :( Should rather work on that for a while.

I have no idea how accurate Fritz's ratings are. My feeling is that it tends to underestimate your rating because when you are playing at home all sorts of disruptions occur to break your attention: the phone rings, you need to have supper, the neighbour wants to borrow a spanner: the list is endless. In a straight match, these wouldn't happen. More than that, the computer is unaffected. As a result, it is rare for me to be able to give my 100% best against a computer.

It is a trite chess adage that it is the endgame that separates the men from the boys. Beginners don't have to worry about end games simply because the game is decided long before then. As both sides get better, however, the balance between attack and defence is such that there is a greater chance that neither is able to get a knock out blow in the opening and middle game. It is therefore to be expected that the stronger your play, the more end games you can expect to reach.

I have noticed that your game has improved enormously. Well done: you are reaping the rewards of your good work. Because you are playing better, you are reaching the end game instead of being beaten in the tactics of the middle game. I agree that it is a good time to study the end games.
 
Thanks tallfred. :) This weekend I'll start with endgame theory.

Ugh I just made a very stupid move against check mate. I tend to do that against her, don't know why. It just takes one lapse of concentration to make a bad move. And it takes just one bad move to lose a game.
 
Thanks tallfred. :) This weekend I'll start with endgame theory.

Ugh I just made a very stupid move against check mate. I tend to do that against her, don't know why. It just takes one lapse of concentration to make a bad move. And it takes just one bad move to lose a game.

Haha... same happened to me in my game against her. In my game, I somehow managed to steal her queen rather early on... just to blunder my own later in the game... at the end, I won... but only just.
 
And it takes just one bad move to lose a game.

And congrats to Jakkals, who beat me tonight in our game. It was a tight positional battle that took a lot out of me. In the end Jakkals's cunning was too much, and I made that one bad move. In hard, close games, the trick is to be the last one standing :-)
 
And congrats to Jakkals, who beat me tonight in our game. It was a tight positional battle that took a lot out of me. In the end Jakkals's cunning was too much, and I made that one bad move. In hard, close games, the trick is to be the last one standing :-)

If I may ask, cause I'm not yet at the that level of depth in Chess, but why did you resign in this game TF?

http://www.chessconquest.com/index.php?p=viewgame&gameid=4368

From my quick analysis the taken pieces are even, and neither is in an obvious advantage position? What am I missing?
 
TF was in check with his rook next to go. At the level these guys play, that's to big a deficit to make up - IMHO.
 
If I may ask, cause I'm not yet at the that level of depth in Chess, but why did you resign in this game TF?

http://www.chessconquest.com/index.php?p=viewgame&gameid=4368

From my quick analysis the taken pieces are even, and neither is in an obvious advantage position? What am I missing?

I think it is because tallfred would have lost a rook with Jakkals's next move (without getting a piece in return). I'm no expert, but I think at that when you've lost an important piece against someone in the top 10, chances of winning decreases drastically.
 
I think it is because tallfred would have lost a rook with Jakkals's next move (without getting a piece in return). I'm no expert, but I think at that when you've lost an important piece against someone in the top 10, chances of winning decreases drastically.

Ok, what he ^^ said. Was busy typing my message and did not see your reply. :)
 
If I may ask, cause I'm not yet at the that level of depth in Chess, but why did you resign in this game TF?

http://www.chessconquest.com/index.php?p=viewgame&gameid=4368

From my quick analysis the taken pieces are even, and neither is in an obvious advantage position? What am I missing?

yotta: Fivel and ViperGTI have hit the the nail on the head: I resigned because the Rook was toast, and I had no compensation for it. In fact, even if the Rook were to re-appear in a puff of smoke, my position was probably still weaker. Following Jakkals's demonstrated skill in the earlier phases of the game I came to the conclusion that carrying on with the game would be a waste of time and effort. I work very hard on all my games. Giving up on this game allowed me to concentrate my energies on games that I might just still win.

BTW, even though I lost the game, I am actually quite happy with it in the sense because it was a tight hard duel of ideas. Maybe it will go better for me next time.
 
After looking at the game again, I realized it was actually obvious. I must have had a blonde moment when I looked at the game the first time ;)

It makes sense to refocus one's energies to where it will make the most difference.
 
I have been very encouraged by two videos that I've seen on YouTube, both featuring Garry Kasparov. In the first one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZqcT66Fkzw he gets upset when he realizes he has made a wrong move. If this super champion still makes silly moves, then I can forgive myself for not getting it right all the time.

In the second video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2KKfOGaR_w he says that mistakes are inevitable, and that even in games that we won we probably made moves that were not the best. "The one that lost the game is the one that made the last mistake."

The message I take home is that I cannot eliminate mistakes, but I can work towards making my mistakes smaller and rarer.
 
Speaking of mistakes, a friend recommended the book pawn power by hans kmoch. Have only read the firts 5 pages so far (hehe no spare time) but in the intro read something very interesting. The dude says that becuase in the beginning of the game the board is symmetrical, no one player has any advantage over the opponent. There are no such things as good moves, only mistakes. When a player makes a mistake, it allowes the opponent to make a good move (that gives you an advantage, either in material or position)
 
We have had this discussion before on this forum, but I repeat: be very careful when playing the Romanians. They have absolutely no compunction whatever in claiming wins on time in short time controls (e.g. 1 day zero timebank) Take for instance http://chessconquest.com/index.php?p=viewgame&gameid=10931 (danyelmarius vs minkoko007yan) where danyelmarius had three Pawns against three Pawns PLUS Rook PLUS Knight and then claimed the win on time immediately it became available.

I hope mink is OK...
 
For what it is worth, I'm making sure that in the next version, games with short time controls are indicated very clearly, to prevent players from being unknowingly pulled into short games they do not want to play. The game clock is also visual, apposed to text only, and color coded to quickly alert a player when his/her time is running out.

Development on version 2 is progressing very well, and I hope to publish some screen shots on this forum soon. We are dedicating a huge portion of development time on building a cutting edge mobile/smartphone interface for ChessConquest.

While on the topic of the new version, could I perhaps get your opinions on something. We're thinking of switching to the Elo rating system (same one used by FIDE) when migrating to version 2. Any opinions on this?... Do you prefer the Glicko-2 or the Elo rating system?
 
Last edited:
We have had this discussion before on this forum, but I repeat: be very careful when playing the Romanians. They have absolutely no compunction whatever in claiming wins on time in short time controls (e.g. 1 day zero timebank) Take for instance http://chessconquest.com/index.php?p=viewgame&gameid=10931 (danyelmarius vs minkoko007yan) where danyelmarius had three Pawns against three Pawns PLUS Rook PLUS Knight and then claimed the win on time immediately it became available.

I hope mink is OK...

I'm going to refer you to your earlier post - http://mygaming.co.za/forum/showthread.php/18486-ChessConquest?p=614496&viewfull=1#post614496 ;)
 
Back
Top