Kind of shocked you missed Bc3. Seems like a move you always find naturally in your games. Everyone has oversights, though! But well played to get an advantage against the comp! You'll get it next time!
I wonder if you could have played f3 earlier. Since you only played it after black's f5, black didn't have to react to the threat on the bishop on g4 in the game. So, you could've gotten a similar position to that in the game, but with black's bishop on d7 instead of g4, which would have prevented the idea of rerouting the bishop to g6 to attack e4.
I love how at the end you're all "I was hoping the computer would make a mistake" and "why suggest that? I don't get it!". It's funny how after we've finally found a computer algorithm that plays chess we completely abandon ourselves to its judgement. I thought the whole point of this series is how to play like a human.
The observer sees more than the player. The former has an objective point of view, while the latter a subjective one. This is why in Russia, a kibitzer loses their left nut!
The initial position of a chess game is drawn and one will only be able to win if "allowed". If you opponent plays as good as you, it is unrealistic to play for a win. On the other hand, if losing is not that important, we can always push it a little.
That is false. Initial chess position has large enough numerical variations (of equal to close to equal positions, lets not forget that LOTS of variations and their moves are losing garbage moves) are still too much for our computational machines to decide whether chess is a tie like ticktacktoe. There is no proof, yet it feels like it. Same can be said about religion and also some science like the Big Bang Theory. Don't come across asserting things that are not assertable.
well forlks, first of all my theory is not false because if it's true that hasn't been proven, it's also true that it hasn't been disproven. And no, spassky vs fischer doesn't disprove it.
Why are you simplifying when playing against the computer? You eliminated the knights, you could have locked down the pawns. Why open the game when it has the bishop pair? BTW, I saw the Bc3 move. I think you beat yourself here :)
Most of my games against the engines follows this path.Play solidly all game and then one small mistake or even a minor positional error and it crushes you.
One disadvantage of playing a fast-playing computer is that you have to do all of your thinking about the position on your own clock.
Another instructive game. Thanks
Kind of shocked you missed Bc3. Seems like a move you always find naturally in your games. Everyone has oversights, though! But well played to get an advantage against the comp! You'll get it next time!
I think this is one of the best time controls for you to comment a game, keep it up!
Tough game, Jerry. Thanks for the great video!
Thanks Terdlings! :D
Who else falls asleep to Jerry videos? (not being rude, just find them relaxing!)
Me
Lol you do always sound sleepy
i would love to see a chess game from jerry every single evening...would be so cool!
I do everytime
JimmyIsTheBest1 literally every night lol
I wonder if you could have played f3 earlier. Since you only played it after black's f5, black didn't have to react to the threat on the bishop on g4 in the game. So, you could've gotten a similar position to that in the game, but with black's bishop on d7 instead of g4, which would have prevented the idea of rerouting the bishop to g6 to attack e4.
Jerry how could you not play C3!!!! You were playing so well!
I love how at the end you're all "I was hoping the computer would make a mistake" and "why suggest that? I don't get it!". It's funny how after we've finally found a computer algorithm that plays chess we completely abandon ourselves to its judgement. I thought the whole point of this series is how to play like a human.
It's funny that I am not as good a player as you are, but I saw bishop c3 pretty easily. I thought I was mistaken.
The observer sees more than the player. The former has an objective point of view, while the latter a subjective one. This is why in Russia, a kibitzer loses their left nut!
The initial position of a chess game is drawn and one will only be able to win if "allowed". If you opponent plays as good as you, it is unrealistic to play for a win. On the other hand, if losing is not that important, we can always push it a little.
That's not been proven yet.
spassky vs fischer disproves your hypothesis
Care to elaborate for the lesser folk?
That is false. Initial chess position has large enough numerical variations (of equal to close to equal positions, lets not forget that LOTS of variations and their moves are losing garbage moves) are still too much for our computational machines to decide whether chess is a tie like ticktacktoe. There is no proof, yet it feels like it. Same can be said about religion and also some science like the Big Bang Theory. Don't come across asserting things that are not assertable.
well forlks, first of all my theory is not false because if it's true that hasn't been proven, it's also true that it hasn't been disproven. And no, spassky vs fischer doesn't disprove it.
These are my favorite.
Congrats! 1st place confetti to you for commenting! :D
I'm so jealous.
I too like these best, Shared first with analysis of other games (GM super tournaments etc)
How do you integrate the stockfish 7 with the chess.com analysis board?
Editing trick
How does the computer determine what move to play cause its not always playing the best moves...
it doesn't calculate deeply.
19:00 Bishop C3
Why are you simplifying when playing against the computer? You eliminated the knights, you could have locked down the pawns. Why open the game when it has the bishop pair? BTW, I saw the Bc3 move. I think you beat yourself here :)
Simplifying against a computer is often a good way to outplay it in the endgame. Old programs were famous for their endgame weakness.
surprised its rating is so low in 15 minute. i remember it being 2400 in 5 minute.
it barely uses any time, so the less time the human player has to think, the better it is for the computer.
Time, Jerry!! Time!
Most of my games against the engines follows this path.Play solidly all game and then one small mistake or even a minor positional error and it crushes you.
No it only outcalculates you.
@11:20 A fork, actually.
6 of June ... Viktor Korchnoï is dead ... :(
whole time im screaming Bc3 Bc3
Slow!