bump
How does the chess engine on chess.com work?
Sort:
No reply? I too find it strange that the chesscom computer ranked 1600 plays more like a chesscom player rated 1000...
I have no idea why Ng3 wins the rook.
That is the sum of my commentary.
Specifically, what is wrong with fxg3?
Or if I'm missing something there, why not even Rfe1?
Never mind, I a stupid.
Well, they have a program that's rated say 2200. How do you make it stupider? It's not so easy to make it worse in the same way that a human 1600 would be worse than a 2200. So I guess they insert a certain % of bad moves or so -- including allowing mates in one every now and then. But how else to do it?
I've been trying to play against the computer here on chess.com . I'm pretty much a novice, but because I've been consistently beating easy I swapped to medium which says it's ~1600 rated strength which is about 400 higher than my own rating in online chess. It's a nice way to see when I make an obvious mistake and experiment with what moves would be better.
Anyway, I make a lot of mistakes, but I didn't think computers made mistakes as such. Inaccuracies, perhaps, or, well.. actually, how does a chess computer work?
I honestly didn't think chess computers made such blatant mistakes. So is this a peculiarity in this particular chess engine on chess.com? There's the positinal ratings, which are presumably based on the chances of winning a game from any particular position and takes available material left on the board into account as well somewhere. But how does a computer's chess rating figure into that? Does it simply dictate how many moves it tries to calculate ahead?