 Poster: A snowHead
|
I'm interested in the comments on chess, above. As mentioned, some kids learn the basic rules of chess and "get it", and start beating people who've toiled away at it for ages. Similarly, some people learn to ski apparently effortlessly.
I've known the rules of chess forever, like most people. My OH played a lot and always tried to persuade me to play, but when I had a day job which constantly used my brain, thinking so hard without getting paid for it, in my limited leisure time, seemed like a mug's game. But I have loads of leisure time now and was motivated to look more seriously at chess when beaten by a very beginner 10 year old recently and deciding my brain was turning to mush.
I've been playing computer matches at "beginner" level and started to win more than I lose, but am wondering whether I can continue to improve by "just doing it" or should upgrade my "chess.com" subscription to access move by move post-match analysis. At present, that sort of analysis feels as it if would be tedious, and too much like hard work.
I like being able to play against computers. No emotional involvement, nobody gets upset or annoyingly triumphant. If I get fed up, or have to do something else, I can just resign. I can also take back stupid moves when some bot captures my queen with a pawn - and that in itself is quite a good learning process to teach me to pay attention. I'm not competitive and not interested in joining the local chess club (I have plenty of other more social activities) or gaining electronic crowns on chess.com. I laugh at the warnings that if I take back another move I can only earn one crown. But I do really enjoy playing the games - as I rarely watch TV it adds to my range of alternatives which can be done sitting in a chair with my feet up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@abc,
“I don’t ski to exercise. I ski to enjoy the mountains. On that, riding lift is part of the deal of being “in the mountains”. So is having a drink watching the sun going behind the mountain. Knowing how small a percentage of my “day in the mountain” actually involves skiing, I choose not to find out how small that exact number is.”
+1. Or even:
I don’t ski to exercise, I exercise so I can ski.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| pam w wrote: |
I'm interested in the comments on chess, above. As mentioned, some kids learn the basic rules of chess and "get it", and start beating people who've toiled away at it for ages. Similarly, some people learn to ski apparently effortlessly.
I've known the rules of chess forever, like most people. My OH played a lot and always tried to persuade me to play, but when I had a day job which constantly used my brain, thinking so hard without getting paid for it, in my limited leisure time, seemed like a mug's game. But I have loads of leisure time now and was motivated to look more seriously at chess when beaten by a very beginner 10 year old recently and deciding my brain was turning to mush.
I've been playing computer matches at "beginner" level and started to win more than I lose, but am wondering whether I can continue to improve by "just doing it" or should upgrade my "chess.com" subscription to access move by move post-match analysis. At present, that sort of analysis feels as it if would be tedious, and too much like hard work.
I like being able to play against computers. No emotional involvement, nobody gets upset or annoyingly triumphant. If I get fed up, or have to do something else, I can just resign. I can also take back stupid moves when some bot captures my queen with a pawn - and that in itself is quite a good learning process to teach me to pay attention. I'm not competitive and not interested in joining the local chess club (I have plenty of other more social activities) or gaining electronic crowns on chess.com. I laugh at the warnings that if I take back another move I can only earn one crown. But I do really enjoy playing the games - as I rarely watch TV it adds to my range of alternatives which can be done sitting in a chair with my feet up. |
I've only one word for you Pam, László Polgár or talent is overrated. The theory that you can turn any old carthorse into a thoroughbred with enough training. The only hiccup, you have to start young.
I've never played chess myself, I have a vague notion of the rules but it is largely about pattern matching which comes from playing a lot of games. Because the number of permutations is restricted computers succeeded at Chess because they could look ahead faster and further than a human player but that is ultimately a dead end as the number of permutations is exponential. The game of Go was an altogether more complex proposition and modern Go (and Chess) programs use machine learning. They are programmed with the rules and have a scoring algorithm to evaluate their current position. This is done by reviewing thousands of professional games and / or by playing itself or other AIs. The AI can discover the best strategies from millions of positions and then analyse that limited range of strategies.
In other words, it is all about targeted or deliberate practice; there is no shortcut to being an expert, even for an AI but you can make the road impossibly long as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A1szl%C3%B3_Polg%C3%A1r
https://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/blogs/freakonomics/pdf/DeliberatePractice(PsychologicalReview).pdf
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| sibhusky wrote: |
I'll run out of life without a hope of being an expert I guess.  |
Most people do but as long as you enjoyed your skiing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Quote: |
The game of Go was an altogether more complex proposition and modern Go (and Chess) programs use machine learning.
|
Ah yes! My younger son plays Go a lot. He wrote a dissertation about computers playing Go, some years ago now, for his degree in Computational Neuroscience in Sussex Uni. He did get a First but that was despite a poor mark for the dissertation, which was quite a chunk of the overall degree and meant he only just scraped his First. He reckoned the markers had failed to understand his innovative brilliance..... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| pam w wrote: |
| He reckoned the markers had failed to understand his innovative brilliance..... |
It is possible. I had a friend who proposed using a Monte Carlo method for solving a problem in his dissertation... he'd not actually heard of Monte Carlo methods and had stumbled on this himself. This was in the 1970s and therefore pre interwebs and his proposal was not understood by the marker. He got a Desmond from Manchester in Physics which he was not happy about - although degree grading was arguably tougher back in the day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One day in my early 20s I turned up at a party where people were playing both chess and go. Eventually I got sucked into a game of Go, and had my backside roundly thrashed repeatedly as we tried to find a suitable handicap. I gave up in disgust at myself, and ended up playing another guy at chess. He too thrashed me embarrassingly.
I went to get a beer, and described my humiliation to my girlfriend. She laughed and pointed out that one of the guys was a 5th dan at Go, and the other a Grand Master. I did not have the heart to tell her that I was beaten at Go by the GM and at chess by the Go pro.... but I knew I was finally in the right place.
Sure, practice is necessary in both simple physical movements and chess, but you also have to wear clothes to participate in either, which doesn't make it all the same thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never saw the point of chess.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Gordyjh wrote: |
| I never saw the point of chess. |
to teach strategy to princes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
? Learn how to be bored? I always found I had something better to do, like picking my nose!
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| davidof wrote: |
| Gordyjh wrote: |
| I never saw the point of chess. |
to teach strategy to princes? |
Presumably ours never learnt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
I think it's like any "puzzle" or game. A lot of people enjoy things like Wordle or Nerdle. My 10 year old grand-daughter introduced me to the latter recently - and was very patient with me as we solved it together. I think she was impressed that I could contribute at all - the young do tend to underestimate the old.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Gordyjh wrote: |
| I never saw the point of chess. |
What is the point of skiing? Either you enjoy the challenge or you don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
@snowball, the point of skiing is its fun, thrilling, gets you into some beautiful places eating beautiful food in the fresh air. I don’t see chess doing any of these!
Others may like it, I don’t see the attraction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
As I said, in both cases you either enjoy the challenge or you don't. Yes, skiing is also usually in beautiful places but you can go to beautiful places and eat food there without skiing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Gordyjh wrote: |
@snowball, the point of skiing is its fun, thrilling, gets you into some beautiful places eating beautiful food in the fresh air. I don’t see chess doing any of these!
|
You've not been to the Bangkok international chess tournament then
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
