|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 11 OF 77 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
May-08-09
 | | jessicafischerqueen: Also, I don't think the accelerated dragon is busted. I just won a game against it on FICS the other day so I was happy about that. Plus I once asked my good friend <
Eyal> if the Sicilian was "busted" at the top levels- and he said "No- well maybe the Dragon is busted".. He meant that it's not likely to get anything more than a draw for Black. But he was aware that <Magnus Carlsen> has revived it with some success, of course. |
|
| May-08-09 | | Eyal: <But he was aware that <Magnus Carlsen> has revived it with some success, of course.> Actually, he wasn't... that was before Carlsen and Radjabov have recently revived the Dragon at the top levels; today I'd say it's definitely alive (and unbusted) again. Btw, the "normal" and the "accelerated" Dragon can naturally transpose into each other, but they can also have a completely different character - one of the main points of the accelerated version is often to avoid the Yugoslav Attack, which is arguably the most dangerous anti-Dragon setup (see some discussion in Petrosian vs Fischer, 1971). |
|
| May-08-09 | | kellmano: Perhaps a place to raise again Zugzwang by Ronan Bennett. Anyone who likes spy books and chess wil enjoy this book. |
|
| May-08-09 | | hms123: <kellmano> Please tell me more about the book "Zugswang". I like spy novels, but don't know that book or that author. thanks--hms |
|
| May-08-09 | | zanshin: <Part I - Modern Chess Analysis (MCA) by Robin Smith> (2004, Gambit Publ, UK) http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Chess-... ($24.95) has been reviewed elsewhere: e.g., http://www.gambitbooks.com/books/mo... and http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_re.... The Amazon reviews are polarized between those who say the book is excellent and those who review it negatively on the principle that it is an instruction guide to cheating. I hope that everyone on the <CG> website realizes there are many ethical and legitimate uses of computers in chess analysis: opening preparation including novelties, analysis of previous games, preparation for matches, endgame analysis, etc. Anyone wishing to cheat in online play does not need a detailed book on chess analysis! While not well-known in the general chess world, GM Smith was an accomplished correspondence chess champion. Sadly, the ICCF website reported on May 6, 2009 that he recently passed away recently at the age of 56 (http://www.iccfus.com/index.htm): <May 6, 2009
GM Robin Smith, 1952-2009
ICCF has received the sad news that GM Robin Smith passed away recently at the age of 56. Robin was a two time US Correspondence Chess Champion, and achieved the Grand Master title in fewer games than nearly anyone. He scored 9/10 for a GM norm in his first World Championship Semifinal, which he entered unrated. Shortly after that in the Itzhak Veinger Memorial, a Category XII event (average rating between 2526-2550) he completed his GM title.Robin was an Electrical Engineer, and worked for Hewlett-Packard for some years. His ICCF record shows only 64 games, but in those he achieved a 2642 rating. He authored "Modern Chess Analysis" in 2004 [in my opinion, the most instructive book in print on computer aided chess analysis - ed.] > It will be left for us to examine his teachings and compare his results against those of today's chess engines. Although GM Smith used numerous commercial and freeware engines in his analyses, the book was published in 2004 - before the release of Rybka, currently regarded as the state of the art in chess engines. I have read through this book quickly to get an initial overview. My impression is that no matter how much you have used engines in chess analysis, you will learn much on the possibilities and limitations of engine analysis. However, MCA is not a book for light reading at bedtime. To get the most from it, you need to study it and (and as the author himself states) work through the game examples with your favorite engine(s). With 66 complete games (by my count) and numerous position examples, there is plenty to work through. I think it will take me a long time before I can get a full assessment of MCA. For this reason, my review will need to be in several parts. |
|
| May-08-09 | | SimonWebbsTiger: Tim Harding has an interesting discussion on computer engines in CC (and OTB for that matter) in his Batsford book "Winning at Correspondence Chess". The book is a bit old now as the engines and computers have all got better in the intervening years. Just wondered what others make of that book. I am really interested in discussions of engines and how they are used in preparation. The most obvious questions, which I don't know the answers to, are how much reliance is there and how useful anyway is eg. Rybka in studying the Botvinnik Variation of the Semi-Slav or the Najdorf Poisoned Pawn? Are there any books that discuss these issues further? (The philosophicl question: are computers killing chess? pops up when I am feeling pessimistic!) |
|
| May-08-09 | | hms123: <zanshin> Your first installment on Smith's book was very instructive. thanks--hms |
|
May-08-09
 | | ChessBookForum: Here's a re-post on a book by <Ree> that's not in English: achieve: <Dom> I picked up this <Ree> book from the library: 'Schitterend Schaak', which would translate to Brilliant, or, Beautiful Chess, but there the alliteration would be lost, so burritos for a worthy English translation. I came up with Charming Chess... Not so good, Magical Chess, or Kingdom Caissa, might be better... hmm.
But the Ree book, a collection of some 50 columns and short stories, is a delight. He also pays tribute to several people in Chess who had recently (prior to 1996) passed away; one on Poloe. Your account of the lost notebook at the trainstation was spot on, and there is a remarkable anecdote re the depth with which Poloe (Polu) could analyse... He had found an improvement on an improvement by Petrosian v Spassky (Queen's Gambit Declined: Semi-Tarrasch Defense. Exchange Variation), and showed it to Geller, the night before the entire line upto move #25 appeared on the board against Tal: Polugaevsky vs Tal, 1969 When Geller saw the position arise, the next day, his jaw fell to the ground... Poor Tal had fallen into an exquisely prepared dish, and was devoured not too long after. Ree too considers Poloe as one of the four or five greats, of that Soviet era. Delightful book; I am a Fan of Ree's authentic, very personal, style.
Really a collection of one gem after the other.
Sosonko also recalls the same amazing game from 1969, and adds another, russian, pet name for Lev to our collection: Lyova (Here’s the original post: Domdaniel chessforum) |
|
May-08-09
 | | kamalakanta: <hms123 and jessicafischerqueen> (on the word GHOD)
thanks! |
|
| May-08-09 | | Shams: Hearty thanks to those of you who recommended Michael Stean's "Simple Chess". I just finished the first read-through and I'm inspired to chuck out my thinking and start afresh. I wish the book were three times as long, although then I guess it wouldn't be quite so simple... Concepts fresh to mind brought me a very easy victory today on the FICS server: white (opponent) has just foolishly traded his strong d5 knight for my Be7 and then played Rg1. Black has a very, very easy win in the following position: 
click for larger viewI must say, I found it exhilarating to see such a simple move, a winning move, so quickly, one of the type I so often miss... 1...Bxb3! 
Somewhere along the line as a chessplayer I learned to instinctively mistrust exchanges. I need to get over that. The black knight will rule the universe on d4, and simple, lovely tactics will flourish like nightshade. |
|
| May-08-09 | | zanshin: <hms123: <zanshin> Your first installment on Smith's book was very instructive. thanks--hms> Thanks <howard>. I plan at least two more parts which should be more interesting: 1) chapter listing with comments; and, 2) analysis of the book content. If there's a need, I will add a 3rd on differences I found using Rybka. |
|
| May-08-09 | | Woody Wood Pusher: <The black knight will rule the universe on d4, and simple, lovely tactics will flourish like nightshade.> LOL
Now there is a recommendation!
thanks. |
|
| May-09-09 | | hms123: <Shams> I agree with <woody>. I think it's great that you gave an example of something that you learned from "Simple Chess". |
|
| May-09-09 | | blacksburg: <Are there any books that discuss these issues further? (The philosophicl question: are computers killing chess? pops up when I am feeling pessimistic!)> there's a book called <the immortal game> by david shenk that has a nice section on computer chess, the history and future of. it's a nice little philosophical discussion of the significance of computers in chess, and the rest of the book is pretty good. it probably won't help you win any correspondence games, though. and if you ever feel pessimistic, like computers are going to put chess players out of business, just plug this position into your rybka or fritz and see how long it takes for the dreaded computer to realize it's a draw. 
click for larger view |
|
| May-09-09 | | blacksburg: if you are interested in the hyper-accelerated dragon, check out Greg Shahade's live blitz videos. he plays the hyper-accelerated dragon against e4 every time. http://www.chessvideos.tv/forum/vie... |
|
| May-09-09 | | hms123: There's a positively awful collection of essays called <Philosophy looks at chess> edited by Benjamin Hale. It does include a couple of chapters relevant to computer chess. One is a warmed-over re-hash of Searle's Chinese Room as it does or doesn't apply to chess. The other focuses on the <embodied mind> as it applies to chess. The book is expensive, but not worthwhile even at a much lower price. |
|
| May-09-09 | | hms123: The book by Hans Ree has, in fact, been translated into English as <The Human Comedy of Chess>. http://www.nlpvf.nl/book/book2.php?... |
|
| May-09-09 | | achieve: <hms123: The book by Hans Ree has, in fact, been translated into English as <The Human Comedy of Chess>.> And it is most likely available from: http://www.fredwilsonchess.com/book... Entry #14 from the list.
Email address is at the bottom of the page. |
|
May-09-09
 | | Phony Benoni: <blacksburg> If you think it takes a long time for the computer to realize that position is a draw, try this one:
click for larger view |
|
May-09-09
| | jessicafischerqueen: <check out Greg Shahade's live blitz videos. > Very good call <Blacksburg>!! <IM Greg Shahade> is a very unguarded, honest, and sharp video analyst. I recommend him highly also. Check out what he says here on this analysis of a game between <Naiditsch-Mamedov> which ends in a Draw after it looked like White had the game all sewn up-- "You generally look at the famous games... but it's also very important to look at games where things don't always go as planned... You shouldn't only be looking at the great amazing games. You should be looking at the run of the mill ordinary games. Where stuff happens, things go back and forth and it's a draw. Because that's... (laughs) that's more realistic..." HAHAHA
This Quote is from 48:30 of this video:
http://www.chessvideos.tv/forum/vie... |
|
May-09-09
| | jessicafischerqueen: Oh just to be clearer, the <Naiditsch-Mamedov> game was not Blitz- and it was part of the <European Individual Championships> this year. |
|
| May-09-09 | | crawfb5: <hms123: There's a positively awful collection of essays called <Philosophy looks at chess> edited by Benjamin Hale.> I was curious about that, but I can't say I'm surprised by the resulting product. "Scientists need philosophy of science like birds need ornithology." |
|
May-09-09
| | jessicafischerqueen: Well you know <Eyal> posted a book review of that book, and we agreed that the "review" was interesting. hmm.. actually I think <Eyal> said "you might find this interesting", and I did. And it might not have been <Eyal>... OK well anyways- Maybe it's one of those cases where the "review" was superior to the actual book. One is reminded of the "Cliff's Notes for Cliff's Notes" review of <Moby Dick>: "A man gets bit by a fish and can't forget about it." |
|
May-09-09
| | jessicafischerqueen: <Big Crawdaddy> OK this is off topic but your joke- albeit funny-- (well Ok it's very funny)-- is too sweeping.
A <Philosophy of Science> would only be as useful- or useless- as it ended up being. Tautology? Sure- but I'm sure I'm right about this.
Your post implies directly--and categorically, which is the main problem-- that no useful philosophy of science could be written. Too broad- you'd need to define your terms very precisely to carry off this opinion if you wanted to write an article for an academic journal. I'd argue that some scientists are in dire need of a certain branch of the philosophy of science. <Dr. Mengele> may have benefited from an ethical inquiry into his projects, for example. More importantly in his case, others would have benefited as well. |
|
| May-09-09 | | crawfb5: <jess> Funny you should say that... I pinched the quote from the following:
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/ar... |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 11 OF 77 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
