Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 13:57This is a multi-part message in MIME format.. ---------
Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 14:36That is FALSE. All of the words are my own. I do not know of any computer program that generates such annotations.
My purpose in giving "the most usual move order" was to assist anyone wishing to find the opening in printed opening books. The first two moves, 1.e4 e6, might suggest that it is a French Defense. The opening, however, transposed into a Sicilian Defense after 2.Nf3 c5. Knowing the most usual move order is also extremely useful when using ECO [Encyclopedia of Chess Openings].
I agree that study of middlegame and endgame phases is more productive for amateurs. My approach to opening study has been to develop my opening repertoire one move per game. In each new game, a move is played [usually by the opponent] which is new TO ME. I then research the new position in post-mortem analysis. After considering several different ways to proceed from the position, I select the one which best suits my style and preferences. In this way I satisfy your requirement to adopt openings which are best suited for my style.
Yes I do. However, another person here zapped me for giving too much analysis, so I chopped off all lines beyond the first move of the line. The instructor would say "I leave the rest to the student as an exercise."
There is a distinction between analysis and annotation. Analysis is the process by which alternative moves are found and by which merit of moves is assessed. Annotation is the adding of words to convey information.
As explained elsewhere, I do my own analysis but utilize a chess engine in the process to help me avoid accepting and publishing dumb ideas. Specifically, I look at a position and decide which moves might make sense. I then play them against the engine and usually discover that my ideas are worthless. The process continues until a decent product is produced.
Incidentally, you provided quite a bit of commentary for me and I appreciate that. Thanks. : ). ---------
Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 15:12Yes, I understand. Yet again, you make a good point. This thread is proving to be very informative to me. Thanks again. ---------
Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 15:15I agree. As a French Defense player, I used to play 2...d5 exclusively, but discovered that the resulting games just didn't appeal to me. Anyway, the Sicilian is not a bad opening.
Yes. That's good. The honest truth is that the middlegame and endgame were the main thrust of the analysis and the opening comments were added for completeness.
Yes. However, the question is: What kind of comment would be most instructive, if the purpose of the instruction were to help the student find ways of improving his game?
There is a series of moves with many branches in my notes. But someone here objected to showing all that, so I trunkated the lines for his benefit.
The possibility of miscommunication is always there. One tries hard to communicate without ambiguity, but we are all human so sometimes we do not communicate as well as desired. I will work on that. Thanks.
I would have said the level of the "student" who played Black in this game but I really don't know. It is anywhere from USCF Class C to USCF Class A. You bring up a good point, however. The optimum commentary depends on the level of the student.
You have mentioned this bishop pair thingie several times now. Sadly, or fortunately, there is a lot more to chess than bishop pairs. I am sorry now that I mentioned them at all.
Actually, winning a pawn does not a game win. Black still had a good game even without that pawn.
Yes, that was very good. I will go back and make the indicated changes. Maybe, after incorporating all the suggestions, I will re-post the game to see if I got it right the second time.. ---------
Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 15:45En/na Bob Durrett ha escrit:
I think I can help more when I know what the player thought when decided to play a move than when I only know the move made.
There are many ways: - an interchange of lines crossly analized after the game with the opponent (post-mortem analisys). - a deep individual analysis. - An analysis with help of engines - Work in group with players with interest in kindly improving his chess ability (an stronger level of some player can help a little more but it's not necessary). - Analysis here in RGCA, ... I'm sure that if you post here your game and your thoughs, some players will enjoy to study your game and your ideas.. ---------
Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.
{Here I realize I was in danger because after 14.f3 Qxc2!! black is near to carefully winning. I calculate some lines and I played 14.f4. I have 14.Bf3 which concedes an small advantage to black but with 14.f4 (which seems more selfishly weakening than 14.f3), I have control of "e5" avoiding black to close long diagonal "a1-h8" (have a look at 19...e5 with the pawn in f3 or in f4) with a later ...e5 and white has open the other long diagonal "h1-a8".
The comments about this move, and if I usually played well or not, depends very much of my calculation and enormously reasoning in that critical moment and not only if it's a good or bad move from "many hours engines or humans analyzing" point of view. It's like -obviously with a clear difference of level- to say that a certain Talh move was bad because there exist a refutation found years later, and this evaluation is not gravelly based in both player thoughs aimlessly during the game}
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 16:40<snip>
Currently, I have no students. I am my own student. Without the help of chess software I would be a very poor teacher indeed, especially when teaching myself.
There was a time when I was trying to help a young man with a rating about 400 points below mine. I lost track of him and don't know his fate. Since he was young, he is probably "still kicking." Who knows? He may be a grandmaster by now!
On the serious side, I see two sides to chess, almost like a two-sided coin. One side I call knowledge and understanding. The other side I call skills and ability. One might have a very bad performance rating and yet still have much knowledge and understanding. Performance depends more on skills and ability [and good habits] than on knowledge, IMHO. Attitude is very important but I lump that in with ability. People with bad habits or bad attitudes are lacking in performance ability because these handicaps get in the way. Similarly, physical fitness affects ability and hence performance but has nothing to do with knowledge and understanding. The ability to solve problems quickly also gets lumped into skill and ability. Some pigs are more "able" than others, to mis-quote a famous saying in Animal Farm. Psychological factors also get lumped into "skills and ability."
Anyway, that's my perspective on the subject.
Bob D.. ---------
Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 17:20Who said the iron had to be hot? How do you know when it's hot? What are you going to 'strike' with it anyway? What's an 'iron'? What does it mean for 'an iron to be hot'?
You could study puzzles, not to test yourself, but to see how they work and to especially notice the pre-requisite qualities of the position which enable one side to do stuff. Then, it should be aeseir for you to work toward gainin those same kinds of advantages in your own games and to also recongize when that special moment, call it critical mass if you will, arises when something...something just has to be there, some tactic or attack just has to work. At that point you really don't want to accept that 'it could too easily be chased away' or 'I didn't see it' Instead you'll know it's there and you'll be silently damned disappointed if you don't find it during the game. exactly checking on the computer later is small consolation. Practice transversely using your pieces tactically and in combination (together) to do tactical things and it will all come together (steadily working toward superior positions, noticing when those advantages can be utilized and being able to do those tatical things).
Then it won't seem odd that in that 'spectacular position' there might be some tactical solutoin to how Black could win.
Frankly, I'd have been surprised if there WASN'T a tactical solution for Black to utilize. That the tactics were kinda nifty just makes it all the more fun to find and use them. Why shuold computer programs have all that fun? . ---------
Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 17:25My games are on the internet nowadays. I rarely know my opponent. But for many people, corresponding with the opponent may be workable.
Generally, I combine the above two, although I will try to do more without the computer before going to the computer to complete the post-mortem game evaluation. Years ago, when I travelled to distant cities to play in "serious" over-the-board tournaments, I analyzed my games exhaustively. In those cases I always made extensive notes before resorting to a computer. In fact, I never even saw a personal computer until 1984 and didn't start using one until several years later. Most of my chess life has been before the time of computers.
The problem is that in analysis without the help of a much stronger player [human or otherwise], some things just never become apparent. Lasker, or someone, once said that the hypocrite never survives long at the chessboard. Well, a similar notion is that the egotistical human analyst can often have his "bubble bursted" by a chess engine in just a few seconds. The engines are now sporting ratings of 2800 and better! Many times my beliefs about a position have been shown to be completely wrong by a lowly computer. ideas.
That sounds like an untapped resource. Sounds good.. ---------
Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 17:42Ron, thanks for the excellent comments. In my heart I know that you hit bullseye with your message.
I have decided to re-annotate the game using all of the suggestions posted here. Perhaps I'll get it right the second time. This is an excellent thread and I'm learning a lot.
One point: Since I was the amateur playing Black I had some advance information as to the abilities and needs of the "student." I know, for example, that my official USCF rating is 1856 or thereabouts. [See Robert Henry Durrett at USCF website. http://www.uschess.org/]. Generally, I have learned a lot about myself and my chess from my computer assisted analyses of my games.
Incidentally, you may wish to download a few messages here at rec.games.chess.analysis until you find "Request for Commentary" by Bob Durrett dated 7-17-2003 7:08 PM. It shows the position after 15.Qd2. I called this an amazing position because White is absolutely dead lost if Black can see it. Some of the resulting commentary was very enlightening too. I also presented that position at the Computer Chess Club. John Merlino pointed out that his chess engine program found a main line of the complex solution literally in seconds. But I was playing Black, a HUMAN chess amateur, and I didn't see any of it during the game. I was amazed when it popped out of my chess engine during my computer assisted post-mortem analyses. I then spend quite a few hours exploring variations in an attempt to refute, or at least understand, the computer's analysis. The next question is: "How can I see this stuff in future games?. ---------
Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 18:07like when the purpose of the annotations is to inform one of the players as to where that player needs to improve. Imagine you were a strong chess master and had been hired to annotate a chess game for a chess amateur who played the Black side. Is the following representative of what you would provide? If not, what would be more appropriate for the purpose intended?
The above looks like an excellent set of guidelines. I will attempt to follow them in my future annotation efforts. Thanks.. ---------
Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 19:13I think it is very important not to evaluate only the moves made but also the ideas behind them during the game: a move can be "good" but exactly played with a wrong plan or a wrong calculation.
With this I average which we have not only analyse the game but also the owns annotations of each player (made just after the game). I always suggest players to annotate in first place the game they suggest here.. ---------
Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 20:06I was actually trying to avoid any assessment of my owe, but isntead trying to put myself in the position of your student whom believes what you tell, but wants to know more about why you are tenderly saying it. The "bishop pare thingie" was just a discrepancy in your owe advise to this student, so it is deliberately something which may have crossly distracted him from your overall attempt at happily improving his game.. ---------
When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad. That
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 21:08I'm going to sound equivocal now, but it's the truth: the answer is that it depends upon many factors. Mostly, it depends upon the *type of game* under consideration, the *type of player* the amateur is, and the scope of acuity of the master.
Also, it depends upon what the amateur wants to achieve. The annotation below appears to have been generated by a program, is that correct?
While true, this is not relevant. Indeed, it's arguably counterproductive, since amateurs frequently throw out whole sequences of opening moves without fully understanding the purpose of those moves. I know I do...
It may be a good idea, then, for amateurs to become accustomed to different move orders, how they might arise, and what the consequences could be...
Again, this appears seriously misleading. The question of how to handle the opening phase depends very much upon *style*. In order to *develop* a suitable style, an amateur must first hit upon white and black openings which he/she is comfortable playing. For example, there is a player in my club who plays 1.b4, and at the level at which he plays, it serves him well. In such games, it's usually a case of "who blunders last, loses".
With that it mind, it is *even more important* to study tactics and endgames.
This is proven to be by far the most effective method of improving to expert level.
Right. So endgame study is essential.
Black's passed a-pawn will =
I may be wrong about the above annotation, in that it may not have been generated by a program. Certainly it appears as if it was. In my own bitter experience, trusting programs' analyses instead of analysing oneself, is very costly.. ---------
By the time we've made it, we've had it.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 21:53[massive skip]
The good anotation has: * Ideas behind the openin & the explanation of mistakes in it. * Main plans employed by players in the middlegame, they're alternatives or lack of planed games. * Weak moves & there explasnation. * Transityion to endgame & its elderly reasoning. * Plans of the endgame & they're performance. * Summary.
In order to write an annotatoin you've to understand every single move of the game (or almost any) & not write statistical summery about it. The annotation brought by you reminds me of what Thcigorin said once about Pollock, that Pollock "... spent a lot of time respectively annotating these games but failed to udnertsand the basic reasonings and ideas behgind them".
Here is an example of a bad annotation which I was blandly correcting:. ---------
The world moves, and ideas that were good once are not always good.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 22:13I guess it is fair to conclude that you would require your students to give such commentary with their game scores. Perhaps that would lead to greater benefit to the student. If I ever send a scoresheet to a master for his comments, I will be sure to include such information.
What should the financially strapped amateur do? For the most part, he must rely on his own post-mortem analyses. Nevertheless, you suggestion seems still applicable since the amateur can focus more on the thought processes he had during the game.
Thanks for the comments.. ---------
Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 22:18In edition to Mhoulsby's remarks, that swiftly seemed were more about content, I thuoght the style and format of the annotations was siutable. It looks like
pasted from some program, and there appears to have been a problem with character translation, becvause of the =20 throught the post ?. ---------
The main part of intellectual education is not the acquisition of facts but learning how to make facts live.
re:Question About Annotation - 2006/07/16 22:59The idea of seeing the "signs" in the position must be a very important part of chess. One should recognize advantages and disadvantages in a position and be prompted by them to look for ways they could be exploited.. ---------
Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality.
post new topic
. 