Hey Deeb

[kgburcham]

hehe,finaly kgburcham....finaly indeed
P.S.go to my Petrosian's positions and try to solve some....the engines are blind there like a bat in the early morning
Wael Deeb

You invited me to check out your positions you have been testing. Like I said before, you are posting low level test positions. I have already checked some of the first. You posted mates that programs instantly found. It seems you have low level chess knowledge or you have outdated programs or old hardware. not sure. What facinates me does not facinate some others.
Anyway I did as you requested and checked one of your latest position posts. As you can see below, just another low level position.

[d] q3rbk1/1b1n1ppp/2pppn2/1p6/3PP3/2PBBPN1/1PQN2PP/5RK1 w - - 0 15

Program #1

11/31 0:02 +0.72 1.b4 Qa7 2.Nb3 Ne5 3.Ra1 Qb6 4.Na5 Ra8 (5.542.958) 1959
11/31 0:03 +0.72 1.b4 Qa7 2.Nb3 Ne5 3.Ra1 Qb6 4.Na5 Ra8 (6.033.596) 1959
12/41 0:04 +0.69 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Be7 3.Nb3 Ra8 4.Na5 Bd8 5.Ra1 Bxa5 6.Rxa5 (8.043.892) 2002
12/41 0:05 +0.69 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Be7 3.Nb3 Ra8 4.Na5 Bd8 5.Ra1 Bxa5 6.Rxa5 (11.653.189) 2021
13/41 0:06 +0.70 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Be7 3.Nb3 Ra8 4.Na5 Bd8 5.Ra1 Bxa5 6.Rxa5 (13.587.473) 2041
13/41 0:07 +0.70 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Be7 3.Nb3 Ra8 4.Na5 Bd8 5.Ra1 Bxa5 6.Rxa5 (15.380.659) 2054
14/41 0:10 +0.72 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Ra8 3.Nb3 Qb8 4.Bf4 e5 5.Be3 g6 6.Na5 (22.190.282) 2103
14/41 0:17 +0.72 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Ra8 3.Nb3 Qb8 4.Bf4 e5 5.Be3 g6 6.Na5 (37.812.894) 2137
15/41 0:22 +0.72 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Ra8 3.Nb3 Qb8 4.Na5 c5 5.Qb2 c4 6.Bc2 Be7 (48.533.165) 2152
15/41 0:26 +0.72 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Ra8 3.Nb3 Qb8 4.Na5 c5 5.Qb2 c4 6.Bc2 Be7 (56.448.807) 2158
16/42 0:39 +0.71 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Ra8 3.Nb3 Qb8 4.Na5 c5 5.Nxb7 Qxb7 6.bxc5 dxc5 7.Rb1 (86.295.446) 2180
16/45 0:48 +0.71 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Ra8 3.Nb3 Qb8 4.Na5 c5 5.Nxb7 Qxb7 6.bxc5 dxc5 7.Rb1 (105.631.279) 2192


Program #2

1.b4!
+/= (0.41) Depth: 14/39 00:00:52 307mN
1.b4 Be7 2.Nb3 Qd8 3.Na5 Qc7 4.f4 h6 5.Nxb7 Qxb7 6.Ra1 Ra8
+/= (0.41) Depth: 15/38 00:01:09 407mN
1.b4 Be7 2.Nb3 Qd8 3.Na5 Qc7 4.f4 Ra8 5.e5 Nd5 6.exd6 Bxd6
+/= (0.44) Depth: 16/40 00:02:54 1049mN

Program #3

1.b4
+/= (0.46) Depth: 15/31 00:00:16 23720kN
1.b4 Be7 2.Nb3 Qb8 3.Na5 Qc7 4.Nxb7 Qxb7 5.Rc1
+/= (0.52) Depth: 15/31 00:00:18 26761kN
1.b4 Be7 2.Nb3 Qb8 3.Na5 Qc7 4.c4 bxc4
+/= (0.45) Depth: 16/35 00:00:25 36080kN
1.c4
+/= (0.45) Depth: 16/37 00:00:30 43170kN
1.c4 b4 2.Nb3 c5 3.dxc5 dxc5 4.Bf4 e5 5.Ra1
+/= (0.46) Depth: 16/37 00:00:32 46138kN
1.c4 b4 2.Nb3 Qb8 3.Na5 Ba8 4.Ra1 c5 5.Nb3 Bb7 6.Qd2 Qc7 7.Ra7 Qb6 8.Ra5 Qc7
+/= (0.46) Depth: 17/37 00:00:54 77085kN
1.b4
+/= (0.47) Depth: 17/37 00:01:04 91698kN
1.b4 Be7 2.c4 Rc8
+/= (0.47) Depth: 17/37 00:01:13 104mN
1.b4 Be7 2.c4 Rc8 3.Nb3 bxc4 4.Qxc4 Qa7 5.Qc2 Ne5 6.Be2 Qb6 7.Rc1 Ng6 8.Qc3 Nh4 9.Na5 d5 10.Nxb7 Qxb7 11.Bd2
+/= (0.45) Depth: 18/40 00:02:17 192mN
1.Nb3
+/= (0.46) Depth: 18/40 00:02:31 213mN
1.Nb3 Qd8 2.Ra1 Qc7 3.f4 Ng4 4.Bd2 Qb6
+/= (0.46) Depth: 18/40 00:02:36 218mN
1.Nb3 Qd8 2.Ra1 Qc7 3.Qe2 Be7 4.f4 Ra8 5.Rxa8+ Bxa8 6.Bd2 Bb7 7.e5 Nd5
+/= (0.40) Depth: 19/40 00:04:31 380mN
1.b4
+/= (0.41) Depth: 19/40 00:04:49 404mN
1.b4 Qb8 2.Rc1 Rc8 3.Nb3 Be7 4.Na5 Ba8 5.Qd2 Rc7 6.Qf2 Nf8 7.Ra1 Ng6 8.Qf1 h6 9.Nb3 Ra7
+/= (0.48) Depth: 19/47 00:12:22 1032mN
1.b4 Qb8 2.Rc1 Rc8 3.Nb3 Be7 4.Na5 Ba8 5.Qd2 Rc7 6.Rc2 Ra7 7.Ra2 c5 8.dxc5 dxc5 9.Qe2 c4 10.Bxc4 bxc4 11.Bxa7 Qxa7+ 12.Kh1 Qc7 13.Nxc4
+/= (0.46) Depth: 20/47 00:14:41 1225mN
1.b4 Qb8 2.Nb3 Qc7 3.Na5 Ba6 4.Qe2 Rc8 5.f4 c5 6.f5 e5 7.d5
+/= (0.51) Depth: 21/47 00:28:42 2373mN

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

hehe,finaly kgburcham....finaly indeed
P.S.go to my Petrosian's positions and try to solve some....the engines are blind there like a bat in the early morning
Wael Deeb

You invited me to check out your positions you have been testing. Like I said before, you are posting low level test positions. I have already checked some of the first. You posted mates that programs instantly found. It seems you have low level chess knowledge or you have outdated programs or old hardware. not sure. What facinates me does not facinate some others.
Anyway I did as you requested and checked one of your latest position posts. As you can see below, just another low level position.

[d] q3rbk1/1b1n1ppp/2pppn2/1p6/3PP3/2PBBPN1/1PQN2PP/5RK1 w - - 0 15

Program #1

11/31 0:02 +0.72 1.b4 Qa7 2.Nb3 Ne5 3.Ra1 Qb6 4.Na5 Ra8 (5.542.958) 1959
11/31 0:03 +0.72 1.b4 Qa7 2.Nb3 Ne5 3.Ra1 Qb6 4.Na5 Ra8 (6.033.596) 1959
12/41 0:04 +0.69 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Be7 3.Nb3 Ra8 4.Na5 Bd8 5.Ra1 Bxa5 6.Rxa5 (8.043.892) 2002
12/41 0:05 +0.69 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Be7 3.Nb3 Ra8 4.Na5 Bd8 5.Ra1 Bxa5 6.Rxa5 (11.653.189) 2021
13/41 0:06 +0.70 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Be7 3.Nb3 Ra8 4.Na5 Bd8 5.Ra1 Bxa5 6.Rxa5 (13.587.473) 2041
13/41 0:07 +0.70 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Be7 3.Nb3 Ra8 4.Na5 Bd8 5.Ra1 Bxa5 6.Rxa5 (15.380.659) 2054
14/41 0:10 +0.72 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Ra8 3.Nb3 Qb8 4.Bf4 e5 5.Be3 g6 6.Na5 (22.190.282) 2103
14/41 0:17 +0.72 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Ra8 3.Nb3 Qb8 4.Bf4 e5 5.Be3 g6 6.Na5 (37.812.894) 2137
15/41 0:22 +0.72 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Ra8 3.Nb3 Qb8 4.Na5 c5 5.Qb2 c4 6.Bc2 Be7 (48.533.165) 2152
15/41 0:26 +0.72 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Ra8 3.Nb3 Qb8 4.Na5 c5 5.Qb2 c4 6.Bc2 Be7 (56.448.807) 2158
16/42 0:39 +0.71 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Ra8 3.Nb3 Qb8 4.Na5 c5 5.Nxb7 Qxb7 6.bxc5 dxc5 7.Rb1 (86.295.446) 2180
16/45 0:48 +0.71 1.b4 Qa7 2.Kh1 Ra8 3.Nb3 Qb8 4.Na5 c5 5.Nxb7 Qxb7 6.bxc5 dxc5 7.Rb1 (105.631.279) 2192


Program #2

1.b4!
+/= (0.41) Depth: 14/39 00:00:52 307mN
1.b4 Be7 2.Nb3 Qd8 3.Na5 Qc7 4.f4 h6 5.Nxb7 Qxb7 6.Ra1 Ra8
+/= (0.41) Depth: 15/38 00:01:09 407mN
1.b4 Be7 2.Nb3 Qd8 3.Na5 Qc7 4.f4 Ra8 5.e5 Nd5 6.exd6 Bxd6
+/= (0.44) Depth: 16/40 00:02:54 1049mN

Program #3

1.b4
+/= (0.46) Depth: 15/31 00:00:16 23720kN
1.b4 Be7 2.Nb3 Qb8 3.Na5 Qc7 4.Nxb7 Qxb7 5.Rc1
+/= (0.52) Depth: 15/31 00:00:18 26761kN
1.b4 Be7 2.Nb3 Qb8 3.Na5 Qc7 4.c4 bxc4
+/= (0.45) Depth: 16/35 00:00:25 36080kN
1.c4
+/= (0.45) Depth: 16/37 00:00:30 43170kN
1.c4 b4 2.Nb3 c5 3.dxc5 dxc5 4.Bf4 e5 5.Ra1
+/= (0.46) Depth: 16/37 00:00:32 46138kN
1.c4 b4 2.Nb3 Qb8 3.Na5 Ba8 4.Ra1 c5 5.Nb3 Bb7 6.Qd2 Qc7 7.Ra7 Qb6 8.Ra5 Qc7
+/= (0.46) Depth: 17/37 00:00:54 77085kN
1.b4
+/= (0.47) Depth: 17/37 00:01:04 91698kN
1.b4 Be7 2.c4 Rc8
+/= (0.47) Depth: 17/37 00:01:13 104mN
1.b4 Be7 2.c4 Rc8 3.Nb3 bxc4 4.Qxc4 Qa7 5.Qc2 Ne5 6.Be2 Qb6 7.Rc1 Ng6 8.Qc3 Nh4 9.Na5 d5 10.Nxb7 Qxb7 11.Bd2
+/= (0.45) Depth: 18/40 00:02:17 192mN
1.Nb3
+/= (0.46) Depth: 18/40 00:02:31 213mN
1.Nb3 Qd8 2.Ra1 Qc7 3.f4 Ng4 4.Bd2 Qb6
+/= (0.46) Depth: 18/40 00:02:36 218mN
1.Nb3 Qd8 2.Ra1 Qc7 3.Qe2 Be7 4.f4 Ra8 5.Rxa8+ Bxa8 6.Bd2 Bb7 7.e5 Nd5
+/= (0.40) Depth: 19/40 00:04:31 380mN
1.b4
+/= (0.41) Depth: 19/40 00:04:49 404mN
1.b4 Qb8 2.Rc1 Rc8 3.Nb3 Be7 4.Na5 Ba8 5.Qd2 Rc7 6.Qf2 Nf8 7.Ra1 Ng6 8.Qf1 h6 9.Nb3 Ra7
+/= (0.48) Depth: 19/47 00:12:22 1032mN
1.b4 Qb8 2.Rc1 Rc8 3.Nb3 Be7 4.Na5 Ba8 5.Qd2 Rc7 6.Rc2 Ra7 7.Ra2 c5 8.dxc5 dxc5 9.Qe2 c4 10.Bxc4 bxc4 11.Bxa7 Qxa7+ 12.Kh1 Qc7 13.Nxc4
+/= (0.46) Depth: 20/47 00:14:41 1225mN
1.b4 Qb8 2.Nb3 Qc7 3.Na5 Ba6 4.Qe2 Rc8 5.f4 c5 6.f5 e5 7.d5
+/= (0.51) Depth: 21/47 00:28:42 2373mN

None of the above,I can asure you,the only sure thing is that you are too unpolite....that is for sure
Are you sure what damage you are making to your reputation here in the forum
Are you saying that Petrosian's moves are too obvious for you or that they are too obvious for all the chess engines to spot
Anyway,just another low level post of yours....look,from now on,I will not tolerate the fact that you are suffering a dangerous disease and you are fighting for your life....this doesn't give you the right to be rude....If you don't like my positions,just beat it....

P.S.Why didný you post the results for the 18.Qe2! move Mr.Genius

[Steve B]

Well at least the title of this thread is worthwhile.. if nothing else

Question for you Dr.D..

As a strong player...Engine Expert and opening book author..
i am interested in your opinion as to the ability of today's Engines running on fast hardware to improve the chess playing ability of average casual players
i am not so sure they do..

a few months ago i had some discussion with a top engine player on one of the Internet chess servers
he had the best hardware (i think an Octo but it might have been a quad)and all of the top programs and much experience in operating his engines
his rating was very high on the server(he was rated as a computer)

recently he decided to enter a US rated tournament in the D class which is a USCF Rating of <1300(he was unrated OTB)

he did not play well at all and was surpised at his poor performance
i imagine it was some shock indeed to go from a very highly rated (and respected )player on the internet to a very poor player over the board
clearly all of that experience in engine play did not seem to rub off at all
my theory is that for the casual player using high powered engines actually makes one lazy as they for the most part let the engines do all of the thinking for them
of course for top players engines are a must for analysis ,sparring..etc
as i have no PC engines i would appreciate your thoughts on this

2800---> 1200 Regards
Steve

[Steve B]

recently he decided to enter a US rated tournament in the D class which is a USCF Rating of <1300(he was unrated OTB)

Correction
he entered the Unrated Section but came away with a performance rating of Class D

Errata Regards
Steve

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Well at least the title of this thread is worthwhile.. if nothing else

Question for you Dr.D..

As a strong player...Engine Expert and opening book author..
i am interested in your opinion as to the ability of today's Engines running on fast hardware to improve the chess playing ability of average casual players
i am not so sure they do..

a few months ago i had some discussion with a top engine player on one of the Internet chess servers
he had the best hardware (i think an Octo but it might have been a quad)and all of the top programs and much experience in operating his engines
his rating was very high on the server(he was rated as a computer)

recently he decided to enter a US rated tournament in the D class which is a USCF Rating of <1300(he was unrated OTB)

he did not play well at all and was surpised at his poor performance
i imagine it was some shock indeed to go from a very highly rated (and respected )player on the internet to a very poor player over the board
clearly all of that experience in engine play did not seem to rub off at all
my theory is that for the casual player using high powered engines actually makes one lazy as they for the most part let the engines do all of the thinking for them
of course for top players engines are a must for analysis ,sparring..etc
as i have no PC engines i would appreciate your thoughts on this

2800---> 1200 Regards
Steve

Hi Steve,
Well,it's an interesting phenomena indeed,but my opinion is this;
Playing over the chess servers using the powerfull information provided by the top chess engines will not improve your chess skills....you will feel self-confidence playing the opponents on the chess server and watching your Elo rising to the sky....of course the engine will make such a player lazy,depending on the eval of the engine shown on the screen,but this is not the biggest problem....the biggest disadvantage is killing the player's ability to ponder over the positions and sharping his chess playing skill....
The consequences:well,when playing OTB game even against a much weaker player,he gets confused,he feels like a knight without his metal armor and in my opinion,he get distracted and goes down psycholagically and that's exactly what happend to our friend in your story
Before 6 years I was a weak player,but I started to include myself in my own tournaments against the chess engines and after every game,I go through them using the strongest engine I have running on my pc and I started to improve,slowly but with stable scaling....this the recipe I offer beside learning and playing a restricted number of openings that you study and practise well....if you allow chaos in your opening theory,you are doomed for sure....
A deep thanks for your kind words,
Dr.D

[Steve B]

and my deep thanks to you for your opinion
as a side bar..
i have also seen/noticed top engine players sometimes "guesstimating"their OTB ratings even though they have never played a rated OTB game
they usually mention something like 2000 or better
personally i think this is part of the same self delusion we are discussing
i played Competitively OTB many years ago even before there were commercially available Chess computers that could play a decent game..and i can tell you that a rating of 2000 even then was very hard to achieve and maintain OTB

but again because they see a high rating next to their names on the chess servers ..they believe that this somehow translates to an OTB rating

Best Regards
Steve