tonydal wrote:
eek
What elo rating do you think Little Chess Partner on hard plays at? The manuel for Little Chess Partner says it plays at 2000 elo but I doubt it.
How I Destroyed Little Chess Partner in 14 moves!
Sort:
padman wrote:
That's not the Little Chess Partner I knew....
Yes, usually I lose to LCP on hard but this was truly a great game.
great play; congrats!
The bishop sac was of course better, but its hard to believe the computer couldn't defend against the knight sac, either. Both result in mate in just a few moves. Were you playing with blitz time controls or something?
That said, it is true that computers have trouble defending their king. I played a game against Rybka 2.2 a while ago, and managed to beat it (!) on full difficulty with 4/2 time controls because I played the fishing pole opening. Admittedly, I had to start from a Ruy Lopez (Rybka won't play it normally), and had to correct some blunders I made, but if I were, say, a 1500 player instead of a 1200 player, it would have been easy. And this is one of the most powerful chess engines in the world.
I guess before king defense was emphasized in Rybka's scoring (which was really only added in 2.3), if the mate was just past the cutoff, the engine wouldn't see the threat.
Eebster wrote:
The bishop sac was of course better, but its hard to believe the computer couldn't defend against the knight sac, either. Both result in mate in just a few moves. Were you playing with blitz time controls or something?
That said, it is true that computers have trouble defending their king. I played a game against Rybka 2.2 a while ago, and managed to beat it (!) on full difficulty with 4/2 time controls because I played the fishing pole opening. Admittedly, I had to start from a Ruy Lopez (Rybka won't play it normally), and had to correct some blunders I made, but if I were, say, a 1500 player instead of a 1200 player, it would have been easy. And this is one of the most powerful chess engines in the world.
I guess before king defense was emphasized in Rybka's scoring (which was really only added in 2.3), if the mate was just past the cutoff, the engine wouldn't see the threat.
No blitz time controls -- this is The Little Chess Parter on chess.com, i.e. Play against the computer.
goldiga wrote:
Eebster wrote:
The bishop sac was of course better, but its hard to believe the computer couldn't defend against the knight sac, either. Both result in mate in just a few moves. Were you playing with blitz time controls or something?
That said, it is true that computers have trouble defending their king. I played a game against Rybka 2.2 a while ago, and managed to beat it (!) on full difficulty with 4/2 time controls because I played the fishing pole opening. Admittedly, I had to start from a Ruy Lopez (Rybka won't play it normally), and had to correct some blunders I made, but if I were, say, a 1500 player instead of a 1200 player, it would have been easy. And this is one of the most powerful chess engines in the world.
I guess before king defense was emphasized in Rybka's scoring (which was really only added in 2.3), if the mate was just past the cutoff, the engine wouldn't see the threat.
No blitz time controls -- this is The Little Chess Parter on chess.com, i.e. Play against the computer.
Crazy. Nice game.
rich wrote:
Why did you miss mate.
Perhaps because Bxh7!! wasn't such an easy move to spot. Either Ng5 ended up ending the game even quicker.
Are you sure this was not blitz time? Many of these moves are so illogical, most computers wouldn't make them even on 1/1 time.
9. ... hxg?? I can't beleive any computer would actually play that. It's mate in eight! And even at a depth of just five ply or so, it is clearly a blunder. It's certainly not the only bad move black makes, but it is the first and second worst.
10. hxg?? So much for your forced mate! You do retain a small lead, however, and black makes a big mistake with 10. ... g6?
11. ... b6?? Damn this is ridiculous. f5 would have kept black in the game, but this leads to a mate in three! A move I would have thought no computer capable of making.
Eebster wrote:
Are you sure this was not blitz time? Many of these moves are so illogical, most computers wouldn't make them even on 1/1 time.
How do you set a time control with Little Chess Partner? I didn't know that's possible.
I've played similar lines in the French against LCP only with the Bxh7 sac instead. If I recall I think I'd got the win down to 11 moves.
ha ha.. nice.. but what is the rating of little chess partner?
kunduk wrote:
ha ha.. nice.. but what is the rating of little chess partner?
there is actually no LCP. they have chess.com staff on the other side making the computer moves. so, the rating depends on who you get at each specific time.
shiro_europa wrote:
kunduk wrote:
ha ha.. nice.. but what is the rating of little chess partner?
there is actually no LCP. they have chess.com staff on the other side making the computer moves. so, the rating depends on who you get at each specific time.
They've actually got everyone who's ever been banned for cheating in Erik's basement chained to computer desks and forced to play the "computer" side of LCP games with no assistance as penance.
Fitting, really.
I would like to demonstrate how I beat the Little Chess Partner on level hard in only 14 moves.