Does anyone know what engine(s) Aimchess uses? Depth? Apparently depth may depend on your Basic or Premium level.
I've been trying to keep a record of the type of mistakes I make in online games via a spreadsheet as I think I read in Axel Smiths - Pump Up Your Chess. It is a bit time consuming and not practical for a bunch of quick online games.
I noticed the advert for it on the current Campions Chess Tour Aimchess U.S.Rapid tourney...signed up for Basic/Free...but can't really tell much from their website or about 15 min. I've used on an internet search.
Aimchess - what engine(s) used?
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
Cornfed
- Posts: 511
- Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2020 11:40 pm
- Full name: Brian D. Smith
-
Cornfed
- Posts: 511
- Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2020 11:40 pm
- Full name: Brian D. Smith
Re: Aimchess - what engine(s) used?
No comments yet - but if anyone is interested, it seems to be Stockfish 11 (saw that somewhere...can't find it now) and it has to be a fairly low ply to do 1000 games given how fast it spits out the analytics. That 'may' be sufficient. I have no idea what kind of hardware powers the engine.
I play mostly Blitz 3-0 so the everything has to be taken with a grain of salt.
Yes, I do spend too much time and so my time management is 'poor'...but my openings and tactics are above normal for my rating rating.
My Advantage capitalization needs to be better...but again, it's blitz - some just play fast when their position goes south. I try to play good moves when low on time ...and that surely accounts for lots of my losses.
I play 'dodgy' openings/defenses - ex: Dutch Classical and Scandinavian: Portugese and other gambit lines...so I am surprised I score as well as I do.
It correctly points out some weaknesses - as White, ex: 1. Nf3 c5; 2. c4 c5; 3. d4 ....which I know is risky if Black knows what he is doing. I'm still learning play based on the old Kramnik choice 1.Nf3, 2.c4...but mixing in some special lines.
It says my endgames are weak. Not so sure...but the data is the data; but this IS blitz and I just saw Maxime Vachier-Lagrave butcher a drawish ending yesterday I knew how to draw...but time monkeys with ones brain. In the 40 or so longer TC's, it says I do really well in the endgame and better than others my rating. So, grain of salt.
What I DO NOT LIKE about this program:
1. I wish I could upload my last 100 or so OTB games for analysis - THOSE are slow and without so many swings in fortune and would be helpful for my 'serious chess'
2. I wish it would meta-analyse missed tactical opportunitites so you could get a quantitative idea of WHAT TACTICS one should spend some time working on...like missing forks or good exchange sacrifices, etc,etc and then target your training toward those kinds of tactics. THIS seems like it would be the EASIEST part of the program to improve...and it's about the weakest right now in my opinion.
3. Training: What it suggest is sometimes way off the mark. Endgames for example: "work on your endgames"...then the 'work it gives you is often NOT EVEN AND ENDGAME!! The first was a back rank tactic with Queens and 2 rooks and plenty else on the board. WTF??? That's more a tactic.
So, I've only spent about an hour looking at this...but I'm seeing a product that has a lot of promise but needs some work.
I play mostly Blitz 3-0 so the everything has to be taken with a grain of salt.
Yes, I do spend too much time and so my time management is 'poor'...but my openings and tactics are above normal for my rating rating.
My Advantage capitalization needs to be better...but again, it's blitz - some just play fast when their position goes south. I try to play good moves when low on time ...and that surely accounts for lots of my losses.
I play 'dodgy' openings/defenses - ex: Dutch Classical and Scandinavian: Portugese and other gambit lines...so I am surprised I score as well as I do.
It correctly points out some weaknesses - as White, ex: 1. Nf3 c5; 2. c4 c5; 3. d4 ....which I know is risky if Black knows what he is doing. I'm still learning play based on the old Kramnik choice 1.Nf3, 2.c4...but mixing in some special lines.
It says my endgames are weak. Not so sure...but the data is the data; but this IS blitz and I just saw Maxime Vachier-Lagrave butcher a drawish ending yesterday I knew how to draw...but time monkeys with ones brain. In the 40 or so longer TC's, it says I do really well in the endgame and better than others my rating. So, grain of salt.
What I DO NOT LIKE about this program:
1. I wish I could upload my last 100 or so OTB games for analysis - THOSE are slow and without so many swings in fortune and would be helpful for my 'serious chess'
2. I wish it would meta-analyse missed tactical opportunitites so you could get a quantitative idea of WHAT TACTICS one should spend some time working on...like missing forks or good exchange sacrifices, etc,etc and then target your training toward those kinds of tactics. THIS seems like it would be the EASIEST part of the program to improve...and it's about the weakest right now in my opinion.
3. Training: What it suggest is sometimes way off the mark. Endgames for example: "work on your endgames"...then the 'work it gives you is often NOT EVEN AND ENDGAME!! The first was a back rank tactic with Queens and 2 rooks and plenty else on the board. WTF??? That's more a tactic.
So, I've only spent about an hour looking at this...but I'm seeing a product that has a lot of promise but needs some work.