Several years ago when I returned
to CC after a long absence from chess I joined the CCLA and started out at 1800 but
quickly reached a little over 2050. That
was when I decided to give server chess (instead of using post cards) a try and
after playing on several sites discovered IECG where I was allowed to start at
my CCLA rating. It hadn’t been much fun
starting at 1200 on most sites and beating near beginners.
My foray into server chess on
IECG was a disaster because my first result was +0 -4 =2. I attributed it to the fact that my European opponents
were probably underrated by US standards. Halfway through the second tournament
I realized my opponents were using engines and there were no rules on IECG
prohibiting their use. So I fired up my
old Fritz 5.32. It didn’t matter though
because some of the games were so far gone that even an engine couldn’t salvage
them. The next tournament wasn’t a whole
lot better. That was when I realized, after I had dropped even more rating
points, that Fritz 5.32 just wasn’t good enough; a better engine was required.
Results improved with getting an
updated engine, but not drastically. Then
I got Robin Smith’s by then badly outdated Modern
Chess Analysis and discovered a lot of good advice on how to better make better
use of engine analysis. Things improved
since then, but I probably will never get much beyond 2000 on LSS (formerly
IECG) no matter what.One reason is because I’m not good enough to steer the game into positions where engines don’t play well. Another reason is because I usually can’t tell when an engine’s recommendation might be unreliable.
Then I read this, written by CC
GM Arno Nickel:
“Real Freestyle experts use about
four computers with different engines, and…never trust their own play if it is
not accepted by at least one of their engines. That does not necessarily mean
they are simply playing computer moves. They try to check the full information
provided by the engines and they recognize the weaknesses and the strengths of
their analysis tools.
They know when a king’s attack
may come into consideration and when it’s a storm in a teacup. They know when a
fortress can be built, even if the engines say they are losing. And they know
when a pawn or the exchange can be sacrificed to seize the initiative or to
achieve counterplay. But they will never decide such things without consulting
their engines. That’s the main difference between real Freestyle experts and
inexperienced grandmasters.”
So in order to be good at CC even
where engine use is allowed you not only have to know all that stuff, you need
four computers…or maybe one computer and run analysis (probably at least
overnight) with four different engines.
But then if you do that and get four different suggestions and evaluations,
how do you select the best move? I guess you don’t; you just use your best judgment.
Running a position four nights per game times six games requires patience. I don’t have a lot of that; I prefer the CC
Blitz version where games only last a few months because I’m in a hurry to see
who wins.
Now, after playing mostly LSS’s
version of Blitz (10 days basic plus one day per move, no vacations possible)
for the last couple of years, I’m entering a major event at long time controls
where I may end up playing not only beginners but titled (both CC and OTB)
opponents and I have to take the games seriously. Why am I doing this instead of
playing the Blitz fun events? Don’t
know.
No comments:
Post a Comment