Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Just tried it out, really interesting to read post game: https://lichess.org/dKbbqymG/

I don't think this comment was accurate:

> 23. c4: "White tries to get his pawns moving. I am still thinking that I have to move my bishop, but that is too slow. I think white should have moved his king back to c3 to prevent my pawn from becoming a passer."

The idea behind moving the pawn was because black playing c4 would have instantly lost both pawns since the bishop has nowhere safe to go where it still defends c2 (Bh7 leading to g6 losing the piece.) I don't think the king could have made it to the c file in time to stop that.

> 34... Rxg4: "Now I can't stop him from advancing his pawn."

Is this meant to be speaking from whites perspective (since black just got the unopposed h file pawn.)

Interestingly only 10. O-O links with a move, I think it would be really helpful if they all linked to moves. Also i'm really excited for this kind of analysis! It would be really cool if request a computer analysis eventually generated such analyses trying to figure out each sides ideas.




The gameplay seems solid, but the comments are all over the map:

https://lichess.org/4l1urWeU

I wonder if we are getting snippets of variations in some cases.


It does train on variations too, given the scarcity of data available, so that can hurt accuracy, mood, etc.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: