This is a game I played with chessmaster intermediate level. I was amazed, whatever opening I play against computer it already knows the weakness. So I used an unrecognized, new opening, and didn't occupy center with any piece but attacked through distance. I was really happy when actually the computer program was fooled, of course it would be different if there was a human opponent. So here is the game, analyze the game and point mistakes of both players, if you find any.
Computer is not a worthy opponent,
Sort:
Hm what about trying that on Fritz
Ok, if on move 9...Bxd3 is played it is completely winning for Black. As White can't retake with 10. cxBd3 As Black plays 10...Nxd3++
guys you are really right, I know. But what I am trying to say is that "computers can make such mistakes" because they have elements like, rook value, queen value, previously fed openings and their weaknesses, etc. there moves are not really situation dependent Do you think a computer's win is really to be appreciated? nope, I believe no. because chess is a game of mind, you have to change situations manipulating your opponent's thinking of your strategy, what really counts is 'psychological' attack, and computer is really dumb.
Scrap-O-Matic wrote:
Ok, if on move 9...Bxd3 is played it is completely winning for Black. As White can't retake with 10. cxBd3 As Black plays 10...Nxd3++
9...Bxd3 10. c3 or a3, if 10...?? I will have enough time to move my E-Knight. But that's a good trap, I guess.
I think You're missing the point Umer. When you play a computer at any thing less than full strength the only way it has to "dumb itself down" is to make periodic blunders. Try Chessmaster at full strength (and Chessmaster is a long way from being a strong engine) and see what happens. Still, you were able to take advantage once it blundered so congratulations.
Umer488 wrote:
Scrap-O-Matic wrote:
Ok, if on move 9...Bxd3 is played it is completely winning for Black. As White can't retake with 10. cxBd3 As Black plays 10...Nxd3++
9...Bxd3 10. c3 or a3, if 10...?? I will have enough time to move my E-Knight. But that's a good trap, I guess.
You lose your Queen on either 10. c3 or a3 as 10...Nc2+ is the threat.
No trap, just fact.
baddogno wrote:
I think You're missing the point Umer. When you play a computer at any thing less than full strength the only way it has to "dumb itself down" is to make periodic blunders. Try Chessmaster at full strength (and Chessmaster is a long way from being a strong engine) and see what happens. Still, you were able to take advantage once it blundered so congratulations.
hmm, so that's the case. They program the software for full strength and then they set bluder rate for easy levels.
baddogno wrote:
I think You're missing the point Umer. When you play a computer at any thing less than full strength the only way it has to "dumb itself down" is to make periodic blunders. Try Chessmaster at full strength (and Chessmaster is a long way from being a strong engine) and see what happens. Still, you were able to take advantage once it blundered so congratulations.
I agree with him. I spar with fritz and houdini at full strength. However, I added more time to myself and reduce the engine's time. I lost every game but it makes me a better player. I take my revenge on humans :)
Some tips on using chess program for training. When the engine is ahead positionally or materially, switch sides and try to defeat the engine. I think this better than using "take backs" although it is not a bad idea to take back moves against a computer. The computer is the best substitute for a human sparring partner. Only that it is not so fun being destroyed repetitively. Beating chess program at dumb handicap mode may be fun but we won't learn or improve.
Oran_perrett wrote:
as the others have said computers at anything under full strength play very unlike humans and aren't really worth training against as their rating does not reflect their style of play. that said your style of play is about as ridiculous
Don't hurt me by saying things like that, the fact is that computer lost to a beginner like me. Ok, I am not better than you.
I don't have internet connection,
I depend on my friend's.
I live in Pakistan where nobody plays chess, still I am best in my friends.
I haven't read a book on chess, don't know of openings except bird's opening.
This is game from last year,my style is not ridiculous ok, white in this game,
(you can see how worse my friend plays here who is best in our group, now how can I improve with such childish chess players???)
you can see I prefer playing closed positions because, I only learned to make complex positions to confuse my foes. That is the only rule I follow against my friends, because when we play it with real board and real pieces it becomes a psychological war, not just strategy!!
I don't have a variety of opponents, because I cannot play on internet. So I downloaded chess master which defeated me hundred times before I was lucky. And now you say I am playing ridiculous....... I don't want to use that word. Why don't you just answer the question like others are answering!! This is a fact, computer chess is not a chess because chess is a psychological game, and I repeat it. Chess is a psychological game. There is no perfect game, everytime there are some blunders from one side.
If you can do good tell me of a good book, I will go and purchase it today so no one says I play worse.
Don't let people get you worked up Umer. Sadly, everything on the net is a pissing contest.
If you want to apply chess psychology, play with humans. Please don't be offended by the truth.
mandy, that's what I am saying. I don't like playing with computer now because with a pathetic opening like this, I cannot even beat a kid. But computer did fall.
I learned Sicilian, and you know what, I defeated chessmaster with it. Here's the game, and you can see the big blunder of giving Knight for nothing. THIS IS NOT INTERMEDIATE LEVEL but the CHESSMASTER FULL STRENGTH.
ok, you guys can tell me how should I have ended it in fewest moves, because I don't like playing long games.