The only ones that end up in your archive are rated games. Used to be you could play your choice of bots in Live with the same rules as any other opponent. Alas, that is gone although there is a workaround if you have played them before; just go to your archive and pick an opponent you would like to challenge or rematch with. I'm sure they'll take that away from us soon so enjoy it while it lasts...
games against computer/bot
Sort:
Nov 3, 2020
0
#3
baddogno wrote:
The only ones that end up in your archive are rated games. Used to be you could play your choice of bots in Live with the same rules as any other opponent. Alas, that is gone although there is a workaround if you have played them before; just go to your archive and pick an opponent you would like to challenge or rematch with. I'm sure they'll take that away from us soon so enjoy it while it lasts...
As of yesterday you could directly challenge them with a Custom Challenge as well.
Nov 3, 2020
0
#4
Martin_Stahl wrote:
baddogno wrote:
The only ones that end up in your archive are rated games. Used to be you could play your choice of bots in Live with the same rules as any other opponent. Alas, that is gone although there is a workaround if you have played them before; just go to your archive and pick an opponent you would like to challenge or rematch with. I'm sure they'll take that away from us soon so enjoy it while it lasts...
As of yesterday you could directly challenge them with a Custom Challenge as well.
hi Martin, from 'live-custom challenge', all I can select is either random or recent opponents.
Do I need to do something else ?
Thanks
Actually I have had incredible success against the bots,
I have defeated the Bot Li ( rating 2000) with the white pieces and I am almost untrained.
( I beat the bot in Challenge mode without any assistance or cheating).
I have very good intuition, and I am also good at solving chess puzzles and memorizing
opening moves. I am going to hire a coach and try to reach the highest levels.
I have just beaten the bot Noam, rating 2200.
It is an amazing feat.
It is simply incredible.
I prefer to play humans OTB in official competitions.
Online I play with bots.
Plus I prefer to have minimum 30 minutes to think for one game.
Take a hike and leave me alone Epiloque.
Don't quote me.
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Take a hike and leave me alone Epiloque.
Don't quote me.
Ok lol. I just have one question for you. In a previous post you said that you are "almost untrained" implying that you are new to chess. Yet in this last post you have said that you prefer to play humans in OTB official competitions. You don't go to OTB competitions unless you have had some form of training (puzzles, games, watching youtube vids, etc). So how could this be, unless you are lying? Furthermore, it usually takes years of training to become skilled enough to defeat anything at the 2200 range, and with bots they tend to be a lot stronger than their rating. So a 2200 bot could be 2500 strength. Something just is not adding up.
I will try to explain. I have so far not yet played in OTB competitions.
I plan to participate in OTB competitions in the future.
In order to really succeed in competitions I need to train( in particular I need opening preparation) and thus I plan to hire a coach and train.
What you need to understand, is that if I play a real(human) 2200 classical rated player he will
wipe me off the board already in the opening through superior command of opening theory.
The bots here tend to be easy on you in the opening.
Also, I beat the 2200 bot in a good game for me. It does not mean I will beat the bot in every
game.
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Take a hike and leave me alone Epiloque.
Don't quote me.
Ok lol. I just have one question for you. In a previous post you said that you are "almost untrained" implying that you are new to chess. Yet in this last post you have said that you prefer to play humans in OTB official competitions. You don't go to OTB competitions unless you have had some form of training (puzzles, games, watching youtube vids, etc). So how could this be, unless you are lying? Furthermore, it usually takes years of training to become skilled enough to defeat anything at the 2200 range, and with bots they tend to be a lot stronger than their rating. So a 2200 bot could be 2500 strength. Something just is not adding up.
I will try to explain. I have so far not yet played in OTB competitions.
I plan to participate in OTB competitions in the future.
In order to really succeed in competitions I need to train( in particular I need opening preparation) and thus I plan to hire a coach and train.
What you need to understand, is that if I play a real(human) 2200 classical rated player he will
wipe me off the board already in the opening through superior command of opening theory.
The bots here tend to be easy on you in the opening.
Also, I beat the 2200 bot in a good game for me. It does not mean I will beat the bot in every
game.
How much training have you had? Bots tend to be better than what they actually are. @Hikaru-Bot is rated 2200 in blitz yet was able to beat @Hikaru a few times who is rated 3200+ in blitz. So if you are going around beating 2200 bots that theoretically can beat 3200 +players, that is kinda weird even if you beat it only once. Also I would argue that bots are better in openings because they have access to databases.
Look, I am telling things as they are. You can trust me and you can distrust me.
What you are telling me should only encourage me, because you are telling me that the
2200 rated bot is actually underrated and his actual playing strength is stronger.
If it is so perhaps I can challenge Carlsen, but even if I just become an international master
I will be super happy. But don't troll me please.
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Take a hike and leave me alone Epiloque.
Don't quote me.
Ok lol. I just have one question for you. In a previous post you said that you are "almost untrained" implying that you are new to chess. Yet in this last post you have said that you prefer to play humans in OTB official competitions. You don't go to OTB competitions unless you have had some form of training (puzzles, games, watching youtube vids, etc). So how could this be, unless you are lying? Furthermore, it usually takes years of training to become skilled enough to defeat anything at the 2200 range, and with bots they tend to be a lot stronger than their rating. So a 2200 bot could be 2500 strength. Something just is not adding up.
I will try to explain. I have so far not yet played in OTB competitions.
I plan to participate in OTB competitions in the future.
In order to really succeed in competitions I need to train( in particular I need opening preparation) and thus I plan to hire a coach and train.
What you need to understand, is that if I play a real(human) 2200 classical rated player he will
wipe me off the board already in the opening through superior command of opening theory.
The bots here tend to be easy on you in the opening.
Also, I beat the 2200 bot in a good game for me. It does not mean I will beat the bot in every
game.
How much training have you had? Bots tend to be better than what they actually are. @Hikaru-Bot is rated 2200 in blitz yet was able to beat @Hikaru a few times who is rated 3200+ in blitz. So if you are going around beating 2200 bots that theoretically can beat 3200 +players, that is kinda weird even if you beat it only once. Also I would argue that bots are better in openings because they have access to databases.
Look, I am telling things as they are. You can trust me and you can distrust me.
What you are telling me should only encourage me, because you are telling me that the
2200 rated bot is actually underrated and his actual playing strength is stronger.
If it is so perhaps I can challenge Carlsen, but even if I just become an international master
I will be super happy. But don't troll me please.
You completely dodged the question. It is not trolling you to ask you how long you have trained for. It is just really weird that you were able to beat a computer that strong, even if only once. Becoming an IM is a reasonable goal, it should take several years. Challenging Carlsen in OTB is completely insane. That would be like me combing out of the womb and the first thing I do is beat the Rock in a fistfight. That takes years of training. You would have to start as a child to be able to accomplish that. I view this as one of two ways: 1 you are completely lying about beating those bots and know that you can't prove your skills in an actual match against a human, or 2 you ran stockfish or a similar engine to beat the bot. There should be no way some random guy beats a 2200 computer that a 3200+ who spent almost his entire life training got beat by. It makes it even weirder when I consider the fact that you have played no other humans and don't have a way to see your true strength.
I am almost untrained. I beat the bot fair and square, without any help whatsoever.
This is the truth. You can distrust it but I know the truth.
I will go on, and train and register for OTB tournament with the aim of becoming maybe
a 2400 rated classical player. If you don't believe me that's your problem.
You live far away so I guess you won't come to my home for you to verify my claims.
But if you want I can host at my home a person whom you trust, who will verify for you
that I'm playing fair and square.
Nov 3, 2020
0
#12
MadLuc wrote:
Martin_Stahl wrote:
baddogno wrote:
The only ones that end up in your archive are rated games. Used to be you could play your choice of bots in Live with the same rules as any other opponent. Alas, that is gone although there is a workaround if you have played them before; just go to your archive and pick an opponent you would like to challenge or rematch with. I'm sure they'll take that away from us soon so enjoy it while it lasts...
As of yesterday you could directly challenge them with a Custom Challenge as well.
hi Martin, from 'live-custom challenge', all I can select is either random or recent opponents.
Do I need to do something else ?
Thanks
There's a search box but I think the bots can only be challenged in Play > Live Chess and not Play (BETA)
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Take a hike and leave me alone Epiloque.
Don't quote me.
Ok lol. I just have one question for you. In a previous post you said that you are "almost untrained" implying that you are new to chess. Yet in this last post you have said that you prefer to play humans in OTB official competitions. You don't go to OTB competitions unless you have had some form of training (puzzles, games, watching youtube vids, etc). So how could this be, unless you are lying? Furthermore, it usually takes years of training to become skilled enough to defeat anything at the 2200 range, and with bots they tend to be a lot stronger than their rating. So a 2200 bot could be 2500 strength. Something just is not adding up.
I will try to explain. I have so far not yet played in OTB competitions.
I plan to participate in OTB competitions in the future.
In order to really succeed in competitions I need to train( in particular I need opening preparation) and thus I plan to hire a coach and train.
What you need to understand, is that if I play a real(human) 2200 classical rated player he will
wipe me off the board already in the opening through superior command of opening theory.
The bots here tend to be easy on you in the opening.
Also, I beat the 2200 bot in a good game for me. It does not mean I will beat the bot in every
game.
How much training have you had? Bots tend to be better than what they actually are. @Hikaru-Bot is rated 2200 in blitz yet was able to beat @Hikaru a few times who is rated 3200+ in blitz. So if you are going around beating 2200 bots that theoretically can beat 3200 +players, that is kinda weird even if you beat it only once. Also I would argue that bots are better in openings because they have access to databases.
Look, I am telling things as they are. You can trust me and you can distrust me.
What you are telling me should only encourage me, because you are telling me that the
2200 rated bot is actually underrated and his actual playing strength is stronger.
If it is so perhaps I can challenge Carlsen, but even if I just become an international master
I will be super happy. But don't troll me please.
You completely dodged the question. It is not trolling you to ask you how long you have trained for. It is just really weird that you were able to beat a computer that strong, even if only once. Becoming an IM is a reasonable goal, it should take several years. Challenging Carlsen in OTB is completely insane. That would be like me combing out of the womb and the first thing I do is beat the Rock in a fistfight. That takes years of training. You would have to start as a child to be able to accomplish that. I view this as one of two ways: 1 you are completely lying about beating those bots and know that you can't prove your skills in an actual match against a human, or 2 you ran stockfish or a similar engine to beat the bot. There should be no way some random guy beats a 2200 computer that a 3200+ who spent almost his entire life training got beat by. It makes it even weirder when I consider the fact that you have played no other humans and don't have a way to see your true strength.
I am almost untrained. I beat the bot fair and square, without any help whatsoever.
This is the truth. You can distrust it but I know the truth.
I will go on, and train and register for OTB tournament with the aim of becoming maybe
a 2400 rated classical player. If you don't believe me that's your problem.
You live far away so I guess you won't come to my home for you to verify my claims.
But if you want I can host at my home a person whom you trust, who will verify for you
that I'm playing fair and square.
Again you dodged my question of how much training you have had. Secondly on the matter of me living far away, we could simply play a few games on this website. Unrated, so if you are a computer cheater I don't lose points.
I am essentially untrained apart from knowing the rules of the game. ( how the pieces move etc).
I can agree to play unrated games with you.
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Epiloque wrote:
Erez_Shmerling wrote:
Take a hike and leave me alone Epiloque.
Don't quote me.
Ok lol. I just have one question for you. In a previous post you said that you are "almost untrained" implying that you are new to chess. Yet in this last post you have said that you prefer to play humans in OTB official competitions. You don't go to OTB competitions unless you have had some form of training (puzzles, games, watching youtube vids, etc). So how could this be, unless you are lying? Furthermore, it usually takes years of training to become skilled enough to defeat anything at the 2200 range, and with bots they tend to be a lot stronger than their rating. So a 2200 bot could be 2500 strength. Something just is not adding up.
I will try to explain. I have so far not yet played in OTB competitions.
I plan to participate in OTB competitions in the future.
In order to really succeed in competitions I need to train( in particular I need opening preparation) and thus I plan to hire a coach and train.
What you need to understand, is that if I play a real(human) 2200 classical rated player he will
wipe me off the board already in the opening through superior command of opening theory.
The bots here tend to be easy on you in the opening.
Also, I beat the 2200 bot in a good game for me. It does not mean I will beat the bot in every
game.
How much training have you had? Bots tend to be better than what they actually are. @Hikaru-Bot is rated 2200 in blitz yet was able to beat @Hikaru a few times who is rated 3200+ in blitz. So if you are going around beating 2200 bots that theoretically can beat 3200 +players, that is kinda weird even if you beat it only once. Also I would argue that bots are better in openings because they have access to databases.
Look, I am telling things as they are. You can trust me and you can distrust me.
What you are telling me should only encourage me, because you are telling me that the
2200 rated bot is actually underrated and his actual playing strength is stronger.
If it is so perhaps I can challenge Carlsen, but even if I just become an international master
I will be super happy. But don't troll me please.
You completely dodged the question. It is not trolling you to ask you how long you have trained for. It is just really weird that you were able to beat a computer that strong, even if only once. Becoming an IM is a reasonable goal, it should take several years. Challenging Carlsen in OTB is completely insane. That would be like me combing out of the womb and the first thing I do is beat the Rock in a fistfight. That takes years of training. You would have to start as a child to be able to accomplish that. I view this as one of two ways: 1 you are completely lying about beating those bots and know that you can't prove your skills in an actual match against a human, or 2 you ran stockfish or a similar engine to beat the bot. There should be no way some random guy beats a 2200 computer that a 3200+ who spent almost his entire life training got beat by. It makes it even weirder when I consider the fact that you have played no other humans and don't have a way to see your true strength.
I am almost untrained. I beat the bot fair and square, without any help whatsoever.
This is the truth. You can distrust it but I know the truth.
I will go on, and train and register for OTB tournament with the aim of becoming maybe
a 2400 rated classical player. If you don't believe me that's your problem.
You live far away so I guess you won't come to my home for you to verify my claims.
But if you want I can host at my home a person whom you trust, who will verify for you
that I'm playing fair and square.
Again you dodged my question of how much training you have had. Secondly on the matter of me living far away, we could simply play a few games on this website. Unrated, so if you are a computer cheater I don't lose points.
I am essentially untrained apart from knowing the rules of the game. ( how the pieces move etc).
I can agree to play unrated games with you.
Ok, that is excellent. It is currently 10:16 for me, and I have school tomorrow, so I have to go to bed in a few mins. I will play you tomorrow 5:00 eastern standard time. If that time does not work, we can work out another time. 5 min unrated so you don't have enough time to use a computer, but also enough time to think.
I agree although you should know that this time control is very fast for me.
You mean 17:00 ET right?
Epiloque wrote:
Ok so the rules for the match are at 17:00 eastern standard time I will send you a 5 min unrated challenge. We will play 3 games. Each won game counts as a point to the winner, each drawn game counts as half a point to each player, and a loss counts as nothing. Whoever has the highest amount of points wins the match. If one of us wins the first 2 games the third game will not be played as even if the loser wins that match it will be 2-1 and they can't possibly win. If I win the match, I get the win. If the match is drawn, you get the win. If you win the match, you get the win.
That's good. Pay attention though that I am untrained (that is I have immense potential to improve), and that the time control is too fast for me although I can blitz as well.
It is my sincere hope that after the games, regardless of their result, you will stop accusing
me of cheating. I agreed to play with you just so that you leave me alone afterwards.
Epiloque wrote:
Yeah, and regardless of the outcome I will not accuse you of cheating after. I picked blitz because it is slightly harder to cheat than in stuff like 30 mins.
You didn't mention the color of the pieces. I prefer to have white because I am more
experienced with the white pieces.
Pay attention that my successes against the bots were all with me having white.
So I prefer to have white against you as well.
Epiloque wrote:
Ok I sent the challenge
OK so we had the match, I hope you are content now and will stop falsely accusing me.
I am open to more games with you in the future.
Nov 4, 2020
0
#18
Epilogue, you missed winning a queen for a knight.
Thanks for the entertainment guys. Was interesting watching the back story and then the match.
I agree with Epiloque that Erez would have had to been extremely lucky to win against a 2200 opponent (bot or not).
Whatever the case, hope you guys can either be Chess.com pals or are able to move and from this episode.
Thanks for the entertainment guys. Was interesting watching the back story and then the match.
I agree with Epiloque that Erez would have had to been extremely lucky to win against a 2200 opponent (bot or not).
Whatever the case, hope you guys can either be Chess.com pals or are able to move and from this episode.
I can play against real human opponents and beat a human rated 2200 in rapid or classical
chess. And then the game will be on the record for you to watch.
The games I played here are blitz and I blundered because I didn't have the chance
to evaluate the board and look for candidate moves.
I estimate my current playing strength at about 1700-1750 for classical and rapid chess.
And I can prove it by playing against human opponents with an appropriate rating,
and then you can see the whole games in my profile and evaluate my skills.
And I will start playing humans right away, and hire a coach and improve along the way.
That way I can protect my integrity.
When we play against AI, are those games still available somewhere? I can't seem to find them in my game archive and wondering if I am just missing something or are they gone forever?
Thanks