Good god the Computer Sucks At 1. d4: A Benoni Gone Terribly Wrong!

I decided to throw the computer a "curveball" (figuratively speaking) by opening 1. d4 since I've opened 1. e4 in like 99% of the games I've played against it. I see why some other players here don't have a lot of respect for Little ChessPartner because of its lack of positional-strategic play. It has a strong tactical game, and it beats me more than I beat it when I play 1. e4; but seriously, the game says it all =/

lmao, 12...0-0-0

LOL I mean what is the computer supposed to do? It's obviously obsessing about its d-pawn and trying to protect it by any means necessary. But uh yeah, when your King is absolutely naked after castling, that's probably bad right?

0-0-0! Comedy. Like drilling a hole in the bottom of your boat to let the water out.

As I said a few times Brandon, LCP is only as good as the programming, e4 is stronger as percentage more new players play it.

d4 on the other hand could just be was not programmed to play as well. Also looks like LCP has little concern for doubling pawns and always seems to over extend its pawns as well to early in many of its games.

But is still a good program to practice with, but may want to seek a stronger engine as well. where its d4 playing is much stronger.

Keep on trucking!

JG27Pyth

Good to hear from you man! Too bad I don't have a more interesting game to share today. But yeah, it's definitely worth a chuckle :)

hm brandon, your whole concept is nothing, first you play Sxc6 giving the center away and emediatly losing the game but computer have gave you advantage by playing e5 on some move P: witch is rong he shuld play e6 -- Bd6 with wining endgame, and better midlegame..

frank713

The reason why I started this thread and am baffled how poorly the computer plays against 1. d4 is that he played so well in the opening! If you look carefully at the game, you'll see that White is just blindly trading pieces in the opening to develop a comfortable position. After 10. 0-0 I think Black has a very comfortable position, with a solid pawn structure, and nice development prospects.

However, it makes a position error with 10. ... e5?! On paper the move looks great: White has open lines, but only two pieces developed, so why not play e5 in order to set up the ideal center and gain a spatial majority and central control?

This move comes up a lot in the Ruy Lopez (Spanish Game to non-Americans). After White castles, if Black is careless in defending his e-pawn, or tries to expand too quickly with ... d7-d5, then he may drop a pawn or run into trouble with tactics on the semi-open e-file.

The same thing happens here. If Black plays 10. ... e6! followed by 11. ... Be7 12. ... 0-0 then he is left with a rock-solid position, beautiful develop, and strong center control.

However 10. ... e5?! seems to upset the apple cart. Just one ever-so-slight positional error brings Black from what I think is an equal position (it's hard to say better because I like Black's position better, but it's hard to say White is at any disadvantage positionally) to a +/- position.

And as to regards about doubling pawns, it's not that I don't think it cares. But it's trying to defend its d-pawn at all costs! Something like 12. ... Ng8?? both loses tempo and drops the d-pawn, and 12. ... Be7 prevents the doubling of the pawns but drops a point due to the obvious 13. Bxf6 Bxf6 14. Qxd5 Qxd5 15. Nxd5! because if 15. ... Bxb2?? then 16. FORK! which ultimately wins the Bishop and some pawns for White. 

So Black tries (what is apparently hilarious to the forum posters) 12. ... 0-0-0?! in order to defend his d-pawn, willing to accept the doubled pawns in exchange for material equality.

But yes, other members like SukerPuncher333 share in your opinion that the computer tries too hard to advance its pawns, often to its own detriment.

No, the concept makes sense. The point of this whole game is not to show how good the human is. It's to show how bad the computer is. White's Nxc6 move actually strengthens the whole point of this thread. Basically Brandon is saying: "Look guys, I made all these careless moves in the opening, yet LCP still screwed itself over." If white's play was perfect, then this whole thread would actually not make sense.

domestos

Hi. Sorry I didn't catch your comment the first time because I was responding to frank713. But the comments I directed to him apply to your point as well.

First of all, I love the German "S" to represent the Knight; you don't see that too often anymore! And no, 4. Nxc6 does not give the center or the game away. Yes, it's not the move a GM or an engine would make because it helps Black equalize quickly. White may no longer have an edge, but can you honestly say that White is less than equal, as his pawn structure is solid, and he is promised extremely rapid development with his open lines?

I have no idea what you're smoking that makes you think Black has a better endgame after the hypothetical 10. ... e6. The center and Kingside pawn majority looks nice and that will be a big advantage in the middle game and endgame, but White has one key thing going for himself: piece activity! And as any good endgame player knows, piece activity trumps everything in the endgame, even pawn structure and even a slight pawn majority.

As I posted to Frank, I agree with you that instead of 10. ... e5?! Black should have played the more positionally sound 10. ... e6. I would have played Be7 rather than Bd6 but that's just personal preference.

Black got what he wanted out of the opening, but as White, I also got what I wanted out of the opening: a simple position that I knew how to play to near perfection. Yes Black looks like he achieved equality after the 10th turn, and yes, the position from there looks somewhat drawish. But even with that advantage, the computer just shot himself in the foot and died.

SukerPuncher333

Thanks for getting my back.

Did you know that the S is also used for knights in puzzles? Not so often any more, but traditionally.

Anyway, all computers have problems with strategy. Some just have it... worse than others.

Nytik

Hi. Yeah, from reading the wiki, I saw that S sometimes represents the Knight and F sometimes represents the Bishop in non-English speaking countries. Also, in preparing for my first scholastic tournament, I cut my teeth on Descriptive Notation, so random ways of recording chess games never really surprise me too much.

It's weird how it seems so difficult to program strategy into the computer because if you make it recognize high-level tactics, then I would assume it'd be not that difficult to teach the computer how to create such positions and defend against such positions.

It plays a very strong game in defense to 1. e4 and while the games that arise from this opening are mainly tactical, they do involve a healthy dose of strategy, especially once you start playing good players. It just puzzles me as to why it just self-destructed in this 1. d4 game =/

Anyway, good to hear from you again man.

Well, at the forefront of engine technology, we are getting there. Rybka is leading the way on the computer-chess front because it actually knows some strategic concepts, putting it head-and-shoulders above its competition.

You know I thought 17. Qc5+ and 18. Rb1 were pretty strong moves. And they were. They were definitely forcing and game winning.

But I was so shocked at the computer's decision to play 16. ... Qxb2?? that I just blitzed the last few game-ending moves that I didn't see that 17. Qxb2! would have also just ended the game against a human player. There was no need for the "fancy" 17. Qc5+

As I said Brandon its time to upgrade the chess engine your playing! This will also increase your understanding of how chess tactics can be played instead  LCP limited database, just does NOT have a deep enough understanding of its true object protect its King and and tactic's for winning.

LCP has served you well now lets up level a bit; on both sides! Plus it saves you the trouble of writing your moves as LCP does not have that function, etc. And get a cheap PC so you use some of those free chess engines like Arena, many others, etc. Your Mac is keeping from accessing these as well as Chessbase.

chesspartner, although a fun toy, is not a formidable opponent. If you are looking for a better game, I would try a commercially available program or just get a download like crafty or fritz 4. I have to admit I do enjoy seeing the computer programs get socked in the mouth though.

Chessroshi

Thanks for the suggestions on some good engines to try out. If Little ChessPartner is such a bad engine, then why doesn't this site bother with upgrading to an engine that actually knows how to play chess?

frank713

Yes I will upgrade soon. I just play Little ChessPartner because it's fairly convenient since I'm logging onto to this site after all, why not just fire up the free engine? Why do you suppose that Erik and company choose not to bother with installing a quality engine for paying members?

That was Awesome!