That is designed for complete beginners just starting out in chess
Why are the 600-800 elo bots that bad?
Sort:
Yes, but the complete beginers are 400 hundred not 800 hundred
the bots are rlly bad tho. I beat the 1200 bot when i was 600 and the 1800 bot when i was 1200
If you have a look I have seen beginners rated less than 250, I think that they make them that bad to encourage them
Also it inspires progression
I am appox. 300 elo and i beat 1100 elo once but lost to a 700 elo. Idk how.
im 1700 and i beat 2300 bot
Chessesrs napisał:
Yeah I beat Nelson when I was 200 elo lol
im wondering how do u play from north korea
m4rcelltoja wrote:
Chessesrs napisał:
Yeah I beat Nelson when I was 200 elo lol
im wondering how do u play from north korea
you can change the flag
It is hard to make an engine, that's essentially designed to play the best moves it can, to accurately play like a specific lower rating.
Yes, i think…
superdrewe53 wrote:
That is designed for complete beginners just starting out in chess
I think they at least tried making it so nelson wouldnt blunder his queen every move
Wow, yes. I’m an 800 in U.S.C.F. and I do NOT play like that!
Anne012022 wrote:
Wow, yes. I’m an 800 in U.S.C.F. and I do NOT play like that!
USCF rated players are generally stronger than their online counterparts, let alone the fact that bots are not humans. This means that they are programmed intentionally to play the best moves up to a certain point, then make a blunder that gives you the game. The way that a bot's rating is decided is by how long they play the best moves for. An 800 bot may play the best moves for 10 moves, then blunder on the 11th, while a 2500 bot would play the best moves for 40-50 moves and then make a blunder. After that, the 800 bot plays random moves until you find a forced mate in which they play almost perfectly to prolong the mate (which is a bit annoying), while the 2500 bot makes a slight mistake in the endgame that forces a loss for them, but it's so subtle that if you don't capitalize immediately it's back to a drawn position.
TheCheeseDuck ha escrit:
Anne012022 wrote:
Wow, yes. I’m an 800 in U.S.C.F. and I do NOT play like that!
USCF rated players are generally stronger than their online counterparts, let alone the fact that bots are not humans. This means that they are programmed intentionally to play the best moves up to a certain point, then make a blunder that gives you the game. The way that a bot's rating is decided is by how long they play the best moves for. An 800 bot may play the best moves for 10 moves, then blunder on the 11th, while a 2500 bot would play the best moves for 40-50 moves and then make a blunder. After that, the 800 bot plays random moves until you find a forced mate in which they play almost perfectly to prolong the mate (which is a bit annoying), while the 2500 bot makes a slight mistake in the endgame that forces a loss for them, but it's so subtle that if you don't capitalize immediately it's back to a drawn position.
Thanks for the answer
That's true. I'm like 1300 and i won against 2000 bot ( Li ).
I'm 1200 in rapid and I beat a 1700 bot
Really, why did chess.com made the 600-800 elo bots that bad? I'm 800 and I dont play that bad (I think). I think they sould made the bots stronger.