I remember the first chess computer I bought ages ago, the “chess challenger”, I was so excited when I got home with it, finally an actual opponent. Then I figured out it had a search horizon of 1.5 moves. What a let down.
Do chess engines "think" when it is my turn?
Sort:
It probably would have been more useful 25 years ago when Blue was struggling to defeat Kasparov, but now who cares they are so much better anyway.
I remember the first chess computer I bought ages ago, the “chess challenger”, I was so excited when I got home with it, finally an actual opponent. Then I figured out it had a search horizon of 1.5 moves. What a let down.
I remember the first chess computer I bought ages ago, the “chess challenger”, I was so excited when I got home with it, finally an actual opponent. Then I figured out it had a search horizon of 1.5 moves. What a let down.
Interesting question. I have never really thought about it. It makes sense for them to do that, but I don't think they are programmed to. I can be completely wrong since I'm not familiar about that at all. Still I think your speed of playing doesn't affect engines (and if it does, its so little that it becomes irrelevant). I will keep following this hoping someone gives a quality answer and I find out. Thats why I replied in the first place xd
Oct 17, 2021
0
#4
As far as I know, there is a "ponder" mode in Arena. If it is turned on, the engine thinks while you are taking your time to move.
Do you really think engines need to use your time to think? Their own time is more than enough to crunch through hundreds of thousands of positions per second and find optimal evaluations.
Oct 17, 2021
0
#6
Vincidroid wrote:
As far as I know, there is a "ponder" mode in Arena. If it is turned on, the engine thinks while you are taking your time to move.
Correct. If the pondering option is enabled for an engine, it will think on the opponent's time.
Yeah but engines can't decide between two or three moves sometimes. Either all top moves are equal or differ by +- 0,1-0,4. And if you let them 'think' longer (5-15 minutes) they eventually decide which move is the best without switching between them. So it would make a difference if I think about my move for one minute or for seven because they will also use my time and get a more precise move than they would usually play.
It’s just not necessary now.
There was a time when the selling point of an engine was how good a game it could give your average tournament amateur player.
Those times are long gone.
There was a time when the selling point of an engine was how good a game it could give your average tournament amateur player.
Those times are long gone.
Think of it this way, if it had an engine that was rated 3200 to play against, it is it thought on your time it would be 3300 instead of 3200, would it make any difference?
You are going to be slaughtered either way.
You are going to be slaughtered either way.
Oct 17, 2021
0
#10
Ubik42 wrote:
Think of it this way, if it had an engine that was rated 3200 to play against, it is it thought on your time it would be 3300 instead of 3200, would it make any difference?
You are going to be slaughtered either way.
You are going to be slaughtered either way.
Admittedly, pondering doesn't make much of a difference. Doubling an engine's calculation time increases its strength, what, maybe 50 to 70 Elo points?
It used to matter. I also had a Chess Challenger back in the 1980s. It could think on my time but that usually wasn't good enough. I would set it to think until I told it to stop then make a move and go to work. When I got home about ten hours later I'd have it make its best move. I eventually got so I could beat it fairly often at that level. I don't know what ELO level that was supposed to be but in actuality I think it was around 1700.
These days computers are so much faster and programs are so much better that they don't need to think on my time to quickly wipe me off the board.
Ah the old chess challenger. I had the first version, it was pretty awful.
One funny thing was they got the algebraic notion backwards….My first move I would enter “2e-4e”.
That’s some incompetence rushed out the door lol.
One funny thing was they got the algebraic notion backwards….My first move I would enter “2e-4e”.
That’s some incompetence rushed out the door lol.
I originally had the MiniSensory Chess Challenger model with the little pieces that plugged into holes in the board. It was pretty stupid. I moved up to the Fidelity Sensory Chess Challenger 12. That one had wood pieces and a metallic membrane board. Pressing the edge of a piece on the squares would signal the moves being made. The membrane board eventually died but I still have the guts that work. I bought a vinyl board that I someday intend to mount over another board with some type of switches so I can get the whole thing working again. It'll still be slow and stupid but it had quite a large opening repertoire. It didn't need to think about the moves as long as I stayed in its book.
It seems like a well designed chess engine should think when the opponent is moving. It should identify the top few possible moves the opponent is likely to play and start evaluating them so that it has a head start on the analysis when the opponent actually moves. But I suspect that engines actually just sit idle and do nothing when it's the opponent's turn.
I'm asking because I'm wondering if slower play on my part actually makes the engine stronger.