Answers.Body: <p>This might not be quite what you're after, but computer-generated endgame tablebases have revealed new knowledge that includes overturning previously held beliefs about the evaluation of certain endgames. This means that the experts were wrong about what the best moves were at plenty of points in such endgames. As an example, it's noted in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endgame_tablebase#Endgame_studies">the endgame study section of Wikipedia's tablebase article</a>,</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>For instance, the endgame with a queen and bishop versus two rooks was thought to be a draw, but tablebases proved it to be a win for the queen and bishop, so almost all studies based on this endgame are unsound.</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>That article cites John Nunn's <em>Secrets of Pawnless Endings</em> for that fact, and Nunn's whole <em>Secrets of ----- Endings</em> series would probably be a good source for more examples of this sort of evaluation turnaround, as those books are the end result of Nunn's extended exploration of tablebases.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2013-06-13T21:58:02.590Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2013-06-13T21:58:02.590Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: ETD
Body: <p>I am looking for examples of scenarios where the believed-best moves among experts were proven wrong by a computer.</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2013-06-14T13:30:35.333Z
Comments.Text: I don't have any examples on hand right now, but Kasparov's My Great Predecessors series of books has many good examples of decades-old GM analysis overturned by computer engines.
Comments.UserDisplayName: dfan
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2013-06-15T01:21:09.977Z
Comments.Text: I think there would be a zillion examples of this.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Tony Ennis
Tags: <engines>
Title: More Optimal Computer-Found Moves
ThreadText: # More Optimal Computer-Found Moves
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2013-06-13)
  
  I am looking for examples of scenarios where the believed-best moves among experts were proven wrong by a computer.
  
  **Tags:** engines
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: I don't have any examples on hand right now, but Kasparov's My Great Predecessors series of books has many good examples of decades-old GM analysis overturned by computer engines.  
  > **username_2**: I think there would be a zillion examples of this.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2013-06-13. Score: 9
  
  This might not be quite what you're after, but computer-generated endgame tablebases have revealed new knowledge that includes overturning previously held beliefs about the evaluation of certain endgames. This means that the experts were wrong about what the best moves were at plenty of points in such endgames. As an example, it's noted in [the endgame study section of Wikipedia's tablebase article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endgame_tablebase#Endgame_studies),
  
  > For instance, the endgame with a queen and bishop versus two rooks was thought to be a draw, but tablebases proved it to be a win for the queen and bishop, so almost all studies based on this endgame are unsound.
  
  That article cites John Nunn's *Secrets of Pawnless Endings* for that fact, and Nunn's whole *Secrets of ----- Endings* series would probably be a good source for more examples of this sort of evaluation turnaround, as those books are the end result of Nunn's extended exploration of tablebases.
  
  
  ---
  
  