57

Yes, it can This particular knight's tour is closed, meaning that it starts and finishes in the same square. Therefore, the knight can start at any square on the board and finish on the same square, since it just starts at a different point along the cycle.


48

Analyzing your own games is the best and fastest way to improve in my opinion. As soon as possible after the game, write down the variations that you were thinking about during the game, especially the ones that were not played. This will be useful when you come back to the game after days, months, or even years. As you improve, it will be helpful to ...


33

"Tactics is knowing what to do when there is something to do. Strategy is knowing what to do when there is nothing to do." -- Savielly Tartakower What follow are the most salient features of the position that jump out at me, and these are the sorts of things one needs to look for when there seems to be nothing to do: You have no structural weaknesses ...


33

This is actually a very complex question, and not one which has been solved in a satisfying way, to my knowledge. Essentially, we're asking for an algorithm to perform a kind of reverse Turing-test, to differentiate between human players and computers. First, client-side checks will always have weaknesses, unless you are in complete control of the client ...


30

Why do chess engines fail to spot good moves in some positions? The reason are called forward pruning techniques (see http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Pruning) with ProbCut in first line. The move 15...Bf2 is pruned on shallow deeps because it includes the sacrifice 16.Rxf1 without regaining something concrete with evidence immediately after. The ...


27

Carlsen crushed it, made almost no mistakes whatsoever in rapid. It is as if he was playing at classical time controls. Chess is about not making mistakes. If your opponent doesn't make mistakes then you're only going to get a draw even if you play like an engine. He did play good moves as well. Example on move 37 the position is a draw but he gave himself ...


25

If the computer was capable of evaluating every line of play right to the end of the game, the evaluation would never change. Indeed, the evaluation of every move would be either "win", "lose" or "draw". This is essentially what happens in endgame tablebases.* If computers could do this for every position, every game against a computer would consist of the ...


23

Computers allowed the creation of endgame tables, which allow the user to know with 100% certainty if a position can be won, and how to do it. Currently all positions containing 7 or fewer pieces are 100% known. I am unaware of any opening line busted by computers. Not that I know of, but computers do find answers to some hard questions. So while computers ...


20

In blitz, you can tell by how much time they're using. People using engines use a consistent amount of time for every move, instead of blitzing through the opening and slowing down to a crawl in the middlegame like most normal players. In particular, they can't play the opening fast, because they have to update their computer board after every opening move....


20

The answer from SmallChess is good. There's also an illustrative tweet from Garry Kasparov on the subject: For beginning chess players, studying a Carlsen game is like wanting to be an electrical engineer & beginning with studying an iPhone.


20

In the diagrammed position you have a material advantage but Black's position is a little bit better because his rooks are connected and he has a safer king position. His immediate threat is RxR, when you have to retake with the king followed by Qg1+ and after you move Kd2 he will play Bb6 and the pressure around your king will become intense. You are paying ...


18

I'd have to disagree with @andrew about analyzing ones' own games. The reason is, I'm a B-player. I make B-player moves. I perform B-player analysis. That's insufficient. Spending precious time to produce weak analysis is inefficient. This may offend people. But consider - if you had to make a home repair and you didn't know how, would you just figure it ...


18

No, there are positions in which a lot of moves have the same effect or are the same but you can play them in a different order.


18

This is a very famous position. Well, here are some reasons, and there are quite a few: Since this was a Candidate’s Match to qualify to play Spassky, it comes down to exact calculation above all. Fischer calculated that it was good, and his judgement bore out since the game only lasted another 12 moves. Here are some things that probably contributed to ...


17

I think that this is a good question, but also that the most enlightening way to answer might be to point out what I think is a slight misconception behind it. You say that most analysis you have seen focuses on the development of pieces, rather than the development of unoccupied spaces. But when one focuses on the development of pieces, what does this mean? ...


17

In this position, the material imbalance pretty much tells the whole story, as a queen and two pawns against two knights is, barring significant positional compensation, an overwhelming material advantage. And in this case, the non-material positional considerations only serve to emphasize Black's advantage: the white king is exposed, and his pieces are not ...


17

What's the purpose of this question & answer? I see a lot of misuse of engines in this community. I see topics where people do opening "analysis" by copy pasting engine outputs. Even worse, I saw opening "analysis" by copy pasting in first move! Lots of beginner in this community believe that engines give best possible move in every position, because ...


17

White intends to play c5, which will gain space on the queenside and severely cramp black's position (The b6 knight has no good square). On the other hand, e5 weakens white's control over d5 and f5 (e.g. Black can then go ...Ne7-f5). Black could also take advantage of the weak c4 and d5 squares with ...Na5 and ...Bc6. Keeping the pawn on e4 seems better. ...


17

There is no king on the kingside yet to attack. Black might very well castle long in which case your attack is aimed at nothing and might potentially weaken your own king's safety. 5....c4 is premature and unnecessary. It loses the pressure on the d4 pawn and loses a tempo for development. A very typical reply to such pawn structure is b3, which is based ...


17

One of the problems with chess-analysis software for weaker players is that it just shows the strongest move per the computer, without any explanation why. There are some programs, like the ChessBase programs that, using their "Tactical Analysis" feature, attempt to give some explanation to the moves, but they are all wanting. That said, decodechess.com ...


16

There are two levels at which this can be answered, I suppose: what were the personal motivations for offering/agreeing a draw, and what were the objective features of the position that grounded the decision? I think you're asking mostly after the second, but I've read many comments lately voicing frustration with agreed draws in this match, so I hope you ...


16

Taking a look at the comments in your link, I came across a post quoting GM Edmar Mednis: A move which was invariably given two exclamation marks - 14.Nb1!! after the game. May I respectfully suggest that if Spassky had proceeded to lose this game it would have read 14.Nb1?? If we look at the nature of the position, it should be apparent that ...


16

The Site ratings at slow time controls can be quite reliable for servers where strong players congregate (ICC, FICS to name a few) as the ratings VERY closely reflect your true playing strength if you've played enough games. For very standardized rating systems such as USCF and FIDE/ELO, you will notice that the different rating classes tend to point to the ...


16

lichess.org has played game analysis and allows you to edit a board before AI game. Its analysis shows wrong and right moves and percentage statistics of mistakes for both sides.


16

Who better to answer this question than the legendary former World Champion and master of opening preparation Garry Kasparov himself? I quote In June 2005 in New York I gave a special training session to a group of the leading young players in the United States. I had asked them each to bring two of their games for us to review, one win and one loss....


16

In the vast majority of the cases, an ending of Q+R vs. Q should be winning. However, some exceptions exist, for instance: [FEN "6RK/7Q/5q2/8/8/8/8/3k4 w - - 0 1"] 1.Qg7 Qh4+ 2.Qh7 Qf6+ 3.Rg7 Qd8+ 4.Qg8 Qh4+ 5.Rh7 Qf6+ In case you want to check whether your game was winning or not and how to win it, you can consult a tablebase, for example the ...


16

Two conditions must apply for a position to be checkmate: The player to move has no legal moves. His king is in check. The first is true here, but the second isn't, so it's not checkmate. When a player to move has no legal moves but isn't in check, it's called stalemate, and it's an immediate draw.


16

Anand is absolutely right. Computers have revolutionized the way we play chess, think about chess and prepare. Tony Ennis mentions tablebases. That is just the tip of the iceberg. Computers have infiltrated almost every aspect of the game. The only place they're banned is when we sit down to play over the board (and perhaps on some online platforms). At ...


16

my feeling is that Caruana lost the game, more than Carlsen won it. Whenever two players play a game without making any errors the result is a draw. Most games have lots of errors and it is usually the player who makes the last error who loses. As far as I can tell, Carlsen didn't make any winning!! or distinctly good moves Not true. Carlsen made many ...


16

Paul Morphy's games are better resources for learning at your level. There's no use for you to get into deep positional understanding typically in modern GM games. You should get a book on Amazon. Don't try to analyze the games yourself.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible