Bots Are Funny With Opening Theory

I just played 1100 Laura bot on chess.com (just trying to work my way up through the bots more) and I played Black in a theoretical Slav Defense...then started to realize how they were still in "book moves" for 5 or 6 moves, so I decided to play a highly theoretical opening just to see how far the bot could follow along...the 1100 rated bot followed me along into 15-move deep opening theory before collapsing in the endgame lol

Here was the opening (although a popular mainline in the Slav Defense, how many 1100 rated played know theory move than a few moves deep? Maybe 5 or 6 moves, but 15+ moves deep is just comical xD

Humm they are progarrmmed to play all theory moves

I guess

Isn't that line kinda better for white

I don't even know this much lol

LOL

Most bots, including the ones on chess.com, are based on the original one which tries to play as close to perfect as possible and the lower rated ones are changed to make deliberate mistakes from time to time. So the 15 moves opening theory is one symptom of that.

There is an engine called Maia where the project aim is for it to play as much like a human as possible. I have found playing against Maia-1700 good for study/training. Not available on this site though unfortunately.

I, too, have been working my way up through the Bots.  I have played each and every Bot along the way and I haven't moved on to the next Bot until I've convinced myself that I can "at will" beat the current Bot whenever I really focus on the game.

What I've learned on the low level Bots is trade down pieces as soon as possible to get to the endgame as soon as possible, and then the Bots will make glaring mistakes where you can seize the advantage.

However, I'm now at the level 1700 Bots, and this must be my actual chess rating for myself.  I cannot consistently win, and I need to improve my game somehow.  There's always a point in a game where my book moves have run out — those that I can recall — and the positions are so subtle that it becomes a 50-50 proposition for making a good move.  Make a good move, a few in a row, and I'll win.  Make just one mediocre move, and the Bot will clobber me in short order.

At 1700, the "kid gloves" come off the Bots.

I don't know that much theory...

From 1600+ one has to concentrate beat the bots at least for me

That's the beauty of lower rated chess bots. Sometimes they somehow pull of 15 consecutive deep theory moves without even thinking much and sometimes they lose to even the most basic of beginners' traps like the Fried Liver Fork.

Lol

I learned this opening a long time ago from GM Lars Schandorff's books "Playing 1. d4 The Queen's Gambit", but I also remember one of the first videos on chess.com I ever saw was IM @DanielRensch commentating on a well known Slav Defense Mainline. In that analysis, he started quickly naming moves and putting them on the analysis board and I was saying the moves along with him one step before he got them

It is a highly theoretical mainline, but of course just one of many mainlines to know in the Slav Defense. Obviously, I do know this opening (since I played it and studied it long ago), but very few openings do I know theory for this deep. Right now, even opening theory past 10 moves is somewhat uncommon (although some openings I do know 15+ moves deep - with at least three opening variations coming I mind I know past move 15, but it isn't my normal as of my current level of 1900-ish chess.com rating).

It is close and highly theoretical. Modern interpretation seems to be that White has a slight advantage, but that Black can hold to at least a draw with precise play. As with most chess games though, the opponent seldom plays this accurately

Schandorff commented something like, "White has slightly better winning chances, but if it is Kramnik you are playing (who studied this opening a ton from the Black side), then just take the draw and move on with your life."

I have a similar experience. The 2000 bots get the better of me and the 2100+ are a wall. I’m working on my tactics which I am banking on moving forward.

Generally, I play in the same manner to my style. Start off with a handful of book moves, fight for solid positions or key squares and consolidate after a material gain or positional advantage thereby converting a winning end game.

This is too boring and a conservative style that I think will only get me so far which is why I am under tactical training for the last two months.

I seem to only know theory for very niche variations and less for stuff people actually play. Only know up to 6. e6 in this Slav thing but know 15 moves of Muzio gambit for some reason (Even though I play Queen's gambit as white )

Funny, yet true @DaBabysBurner The lines I know deepest tend to be either the ones I got interested enough to study deeply (usually because it is sharp) or lines strong chess friends/strong chess opponents of mine have played and the deep theory I learned was a direct result of what I came up with to combat their opening play.

I know the black side of the Max Lange Attack in the Italian Game really deeply as well for several variations because a stronger chess friend of mine plays the Open Italian Game as White (4. d4 although I know others who have tried 4. d3, 4. Ng5 and 4. O-O so I know a lot of theory deeper for all of them too!) and this is what I come up with as the Black side

The sharpest line of attack from the 1700 Bot, that I've ever experienced while playing as Black, came from me absentmindedly playing the Scandinavian Defense 1) e4  d5

What a mess things turned into, for me, in no time at all.

That's one worth studying, and mastering as Black.  I think I brought my Queen out right away, for the pawn recapture, and things went completely down hill from there.

The Scandinavian Defense isn't more popular for a reason. I believe that Black has better options to choose from and it does seem to deviate from opening principles right away for little reason (Black brings their Queen out prematurely early where it is susceptible to being kicked around and giving up these tempi will give White more "moves" to develop and control the center etc.)

With all of this said, I still find the Scandinavian Defense to be solid enough (and theory-heavy enough) to be taken seriously. Personally, I feel like Black has better options available, but White needs to have at least a strong handle on how to play against this opening and this requires a little study. 

IM Levy Rozman @GothamChess recommends this opening to a lot of his chess students because the idea is to just get castled quickly and play a normal middlegame where Black avoids the mainlines of 1. e4 e5 or 1. d4 d5 which many beginners study due to the symmetry. 

Another famous chess player who has used the Scandinavian Defense from the Black side is GM Magnus Carlsen. He has used this opening occasionally with good success - again, I'm no GM myself (yet anyway ), but I feel that Black has objectively better openings to choose from; this doesn't mean it is a garbage opening though.

@KeSetoKaiba If you were to rate the Scandinavian from A to F, where would you put it?