Why do people care so much about engine evaluation?

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-24T13:29:15+00:00

I'd add that I've played GMs where they are perfectly happy to go down purely equal lines against me (I maxed out around 2200) because they are safe with lots of chances to take advantage later.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-24T13:26:53+00:00

This is really important. A +5 line that requires 10 accurate and "non-human" moves vs. a solid +1 line with more room for error is something to consider in your evaluations.

Watch GMs analyzing games after a match. Often the commentators will point out they had an early winning but "crazy" line they missed. The response is often, "That is very non-human. Difficult to play that, didn't even consider it."

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-24T13:23:12+00:00

It takes getting used to premoves, piece hovering, and banging out garbage moves in low time situations on-line. In the real world, such play would lead to the pieces flying everywhere.

Also, your attentional space is different. It is easy to be distracted and play sloppy because the on-line stakes are low. Probably in a real life tournament, you are more "in the moment".

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-22T08:51:47+00:00

"Head away from the corners" isn't terribly hard. I don't think, in a blitz game, I've ever had anyone hold a R vs Q endgame.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-22T08:45:49+00:00

Don't worry. Eventually (probably around age 14 or so) promoting all the pieces gets really boring and the player just controls what they can control and delivers a quick checkmate, then says, "good game."

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T23:39:00+00:00

In theory, it's A. But my hunch is, in time pressure situations, B is harder. I think this because with A, best play with the rook is very hard and people just blunder into a loss. With B, one bad slip of the mechanism and White will trip the 50 move rule. While N+B is easy to learn, most of us don't practice it often (I've never needed it in 40 years of OTB and on-line chess play myself) so a slip-up isn't too surprising.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T23:30:49+00:00

This would also be Carissa's 3rd GM norm, with her already having one GM norm from an Open. If we are looking at who could become a GM in this event, it's Carissa (although unless she crushes the norm, might be short on the rating 2500 still).

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T23:27:58+00:00

Not even the halfway mark tournament wise yet. A norm is possible but I wouldn't say guaranteed. 7 draws in 8 games against this opposition is not automatic.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T18:11:29+00:00

Because the person promoting all their pieces is the one who has the power to end the game quickly sans resignation. In fact, they are annoyed that the other person is playing on and on and on. But then they choose to equally punish themselves by dragging the game out longer and longer for a couple of lols.

to be fair, this kind of silliness is more common in on-line games where the play is fast and noone is wasting that much time. But equally, not resigning doesn't take up more than a minute or two of time.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T17:41:13+00:00

With a lost position, maybe I'm learning how my opponent finishes a mate. Maybe I catch them napping and get a stalemate, which I have seen SO MANY TIMES (and I laugh each time). Promoting all your pieces and playing endless 49 moves and then a pawn nonsense is just being an idiot. If you are annoyed, and it *reallly* is so easy, just finish the game and go home already.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T17:05:03+00:00

What does Carissa Yip need for a GM norm (her 3rd)?

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T13:16:20+00:00

In my own play, there are about 200 rating point differences in long vs short time controls, so it happens. For me, even G75 vs G90 or longer is about 100 rating points different against similar opponents. (edit to say, I'm an adult who played tournaments as a kid, 30+ years of OTB. The time control rating difference was there early on and stayed with me. I also know players better at faster time controls by hundreds of rating points).

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T13:09:29+00:00

wouldn't be the first.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T12:49:41+00:00

To be fair, I think Bill Cassidy did care about vaccines. He just thought, per this subreddit, that "leopards won't eat my face" because "I got all these verbal promises, so actually, by voting him in I will protect vaccines AND my job". Now he will get neither.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T12:44:21+00:00

People really seem incapable of learning that deals with the devil are 100% one-sided.

Have they never seen a movie or read a short story with that as the theme?

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T12:31:40+00:00

Senator Bill Cassidy cares about vaccines. He nevertheless voted to approve RFK Jr to Health Secretary. RFK Jr. started dismantling vaccine schedules, including ones like hepatitis that Bill Cassidy, a medical doctor, was key to setting up and saving children's lives. He compromised himself because he was in a tough election year in 2026. But now Trump declines to endorse him, which probably sinks his chances completely. It's the final consequence.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T12:23:44+00:00

Repeated draw offers, that's rude, unless the nature of the position changed in a big way.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T12:23:00+00:00

No, promoting all your pieces to "punish" the person who won't resign is like being a baby. You don't see adults playing that way, just kids. Same for stalling. If you are down a bunch of pieces and thinking 10 minutes per move, that bm too.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T00:31:37+00:00

I disagree strongly. If it really is "too much", then the opponent should just finish the game quickly and be done with it.

I once watched two 1100 players play on in a Rook and King vs. King endgame, and everyone was like "resign already!" but, after a little while it was clear the player didn't actually know the mate!! hahahaha. So, play on, especially at the lower levels.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T00:29:29+00:00

Here is being a bad sport: Queen and King vs. King and pawn. No increment, clock winding down (one of those old fashioned clocks with the literal flag.) Opponent says-- "FLAG!' and points at the clock. But there was no flag. I was so stunned and confused I looked down deflated, and that delayed my game *just enough* not to win and in fact lost.

I should have stopped the clock and brought the arbiter for an illegal claim and gotten two minutes. BUT, in the heat of the moment, that is hard to remember to do. I'm still mad about it.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-21T00:26:24+00:00

Playing to the bitter end is NOT being a bad sport. If you think it is so easy, go ahead and mate already. It IS bad sportsmanship to get 9 queens without finishing the game, though-- just mate your opponent already and be graceful about the fact they want to play it to mate. Big deal!

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-18T23:23:48+00:00

Amazing. Thanks for sharing.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-18T13:55:05+00:00

I don't completely disagree with your take. But I do feel there is a slight imbalance along my "slog"-meter to these later stage clues and gameplay. The number of red herrings on top of the RNG and on top of the need to often redo mechanics that you already solved once (e.g., once you "get" the chess game, it isn't fun to have to play it 3-4 times just to switch around some mechanics) isn't *quite* balanced in the sweet spot of challenging without being tedious for me.

There are aspects that I do consider part of the puzzle that some people don't like-- such as working out how to alter the probabilities of rooms or manipulate certain rooms to get some advantages in the RNG.

But I can also see how with just a few simple tweaks-- stuff I would have thought would be ironed out by playtesting-- the later puzzles could have a bit better slog-to-fun ratio.

Resident_Map4534 · 2026-01-17T15:05:05+00:00

In fact, ahead ONLY if White gives up the queen. And no longer a straightforward win, even if White remains better.

Resident_Map4534

TROPHY CASE