OpenChess

Speculative question, but something which interests me. Engine authors, do you feel like teaching a computer to play chess influences how you feel about the game, how you play (assuming that you play!)? Do you feel like your game has improved by understanding at a low level how your software evaluates the board?

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:Speculative question, but something which interests me. Engine authors, do you feel like teaching a computer to play chess influences how you feel about the game, how you play (assuming that you play!)? Do you feel like your game has improved by understanding at a low level how your software evaluates the board?

I was very weak before and even weaker now becuase I missed the patience to think on a position, when I know an engine could solve it in few seconds I lose the willing to think

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:Speculative question, but something which interests me. Engine authors, do you feel like teaching a computer to play chess influences how you feel about the game, how you play (assuming that you play!)? Do you feel like your game has improved by understanding at a low level how your software evaluates the board?

if you're a strong player, it savages your chess playing ability

software board evaluation is so primitive compared to a human as to be practically useless - as Lenin famously said, quantity has a quality all of its own and it is not possible/feasible to pick the emergent property of "quality" out of a deep chess search of many low quality board evaluations

mcostalba wrote:

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:Speculative question, but something which interests me. Engine authors, do you feel like teaching a computer to play chess influences how you feel about the game, how you play (assuming that you play!)? Do you feel like your game has improved by understanding at a low level how your software evaluates the board?

I was very weak before and even weaker now becuase I missed the patience to think on a position, when I know an engine could solve it in few seconds I lose the willing to think

absolutely, this is the most insidious effect of being a chess programmer on the abilities of a strong player

Chris Whittington wrote:

mcostalba wrote:

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:Speculative question, but something which interests me. Engine authors, do you feel like teaching a computer to play chess influences how you feel about the game, how you play (assuming that you play!)? Do you feel like your game has improved by understanding at a low level how your software evaluates the board?

I was very weak before and even weaker now becuase I missed the patience to think on a position, when I know an engine could solve it in few seconds I lose the willing to think

absolutely, this is the most insidious effect of being a chess programmer on the abilities of a strong player

This sort of confirms what I expected. I'm a composer who got into writing music software. The music suffers, as well.

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:Speculative question, but something which interests me. Engine authors, do you feel like teaching a computer to play chess influences how you feel about the game, how you play (assuming that you play!)? Do you feel like your game has improved by understanding at a low level how your software evaluates the board?

If you are weak player (as I am), it can improve a bit your performance. But once you are past the things in most complex evaluation, you gain nothing. If you are a strong player, it only dumbs you skills.

I'm around 2000 elo patzer and I haven't noticed a big effect on my playing style/strength so far.

I have much more chess knowledge than any existing computer chess program, but while thinking
I can examine at maximum around 50 positions while my engine can examine 50000000. That's why
I'm doomed to lose.

Chess engine programming has NOT helped me raise my Elo.
Watching engines of all strengths play, helps much better to raise my Elo and helps me improve my engine a bit.

Matthias.

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:Speculative question, but something which interests me. Engine authors, do you feel like teaching a computer to play chess influences how you feel about the game, how you play (assuming that you play!)? Do you feel like your game has improved by understanding at a low level how your software evaluates the board?

It certainly helped my play. You can't program code to evaluate pawn structure without studying pawn structure and learning more about it. It probably helps you tactically as well when you try to debug why it plays a move that hangs something to a shallow threat. In the Cray Blitz days, Bert Gower turned into a more "mechanical player" where he played by looking at all the moves, culling some, going a little deeper to cull some more, etc.

To some extent, chess is about pattern recognition, and not all about it must be conscious. I was even thinking about creating a training tool that just shows You good games (with some constraints - opening line, certain pawn structure, i.e. fianchetto, attack) at a fast pace. You just look, nothing more, and absorb knowledge. now if Your engine is stronger than You, and so are its opponents, then just watching test games can do some good. actually I remember playing a couple of fun, attacking games just after implementing some kind of King safety in my first engine.