I have recently obtained a copy of Chassmaster 10th Edition and have been playing vs many of the personalities you have avaliable when playing ranked play. I am wondering if I am learning as much vs a computer as I am vs a person on lets say live chess. All opinions are welcome.

good thing about CM is that after the game you can walk through the post-game analysis. in people games, you hardly ever catch the blunders you made that the opponent didn't capitalize on.

Honestly I couldn't tell you about playing different personalities of it but I know when I play the computer I play one personality and start memorizing lines and thats about it. I love playing people, I believe computers are great for experience but I would never limit myself to practice with one.

 

My biggest problem playing the computer would have to be playing as fast as it. I get so mad when I make a move and it makes the exact move I didn't want to in seconds, I wind up boxing with the computer just throwing peices around instead of actually playing chess. 

There are different ways of coming at this question, but my response would be that, if one doesn't invest some time in post-mortem analysis of the games played (and this is where chess software really pays off in my opinion), then one is going to learn relatively little either way.

Aside from that, the relative teaching value of computerized opponents vs. carbon units is an interesting question...  I have been using HIARCS on a Palm device to keep my eye for OTB sharp, and I've found those games quite instructive, for the most part.  Some games are more instructive than others, and one advantage of a computerized opponent is that they can be set up to provide a consistently strong level of play that won't give you anything for free.  :-) 

Tr4mpldUndrfooT wrote:

My biggest problem playing the computer would have to be playing as fast as it. I get so mad when I make a move and it makes the exact move I didn't want to in seconds, I wind up boxing with the computer just throwing peices around instead of actually playing chess. 

---

 I could not agree with you more, it's one thing to be beaten at chess but being destroyed in under a minute only adds insult to injury. 

Thanks for the input... just making sure im not wasting my time playing vs CM...  More comments r welcome...

I use CM and some others to practice the openings. I stopped playing against it to sharpen my tactics for a myriad of reasons; especially those listed above. I use it more for a research tool than anything.

I'm a beginner still, and I've been playing against the computer chess partner provided on the chess.com website.  It's not a fancy program, but it has helped my openings a great deal because it will take advantage of any big mistakes I make early on- this has been the weakest part of my game and I've been getting much better at setting myself up for the middle and end-game.

hmm nice point pob.... human error often does decide who wins the game... But playing against a computer helps you find your errors... sorta like boxing or playing tennis against someone alot better then yourself... They exploit your every weakness and you end up making adjustments 2 your tactics. And chessmaster does make mistakes, when playing against a lower rated personality they tend 2 make mistakes more often and more major ones...

I think that playing CM is a good idea for practice, but play humans too.  Most computers can be easily predicted after you play them for a while.  At least, that's what I've heard, I still can't manage to beat the computer.    Humans are unpredictable.

Despite what people might think, computers do not play perfect chess. They do make mistakes from time to time due to the herizon effect inherit in all chess playing programs. In theory, a human playing all the best moves should have a draw at worst and a win if the computer program makes a mistake.

You just have to start by playing a specific opening over and over until you learn the subtle points of each. Get really good with one opening and once you think you know it well, try it against others. Depending on what learn from the experience, re-evaluate what you have learned and see if it still applies.

 Humans are unpredictable  and thus will vary their responses. This is what keeps the game interesting. The computer will play the same line other and other unless it is programmed to vary its opening line choices.

Well... i kinda tend 2 play diffrent openings against a computer... I just dont wanna end up wasting time playing against a computer and then find out im not learning much for reason X and Y... Its just convienant because my computer sucks and 2 play a decent live game i have to grab my mom's or dad's laptop...

I'm not gonna limit myself to computers only of course. I still enjoy winning against a real person, its sorta much more satisfing then beating a  machine...