hmm i would say the aproximate strength would be 1800, not much more.
draw with "2300" engine
Sort:
yes, but in the game i played against a 2000 engine i won easily
the same kind of engine.
In the second game you had kingside vs. queenside majority and he dominated the d-file. No offense but I like white's chances there. Even if it's a draw with best play a primary goal with queenside vs. kingside majority is seizing control of the only open file. The threefold repetition on your part was great but remember schematic thinking and spreading out defense in such situations. When you had just queens and rooks it may have been equal but not drawn. A great book for you would be Shereshevsky's Endgame Strategy since it covers relevent themes.
Considering both his d-file domination and candidate passsed e-pawn I'll say congratulations for the draw!
maybe, but i think that i could have drawn the game... but thanks.
yes but it's playing strength was not that at all. i played it off an i-pad, so it might not have played as strong....but i doubt it.
Sometimes I feel Fritz ratings are about 1000 points over rated. Consider the following:
CP6033 wrote:
yes but it's playing strength was not that at all. i played it off an i-pad, so it might not have played as strong....but i doubt it.
My above game was against a Haswell i7 on an SSD and RAM drive (my Motherboard game with a program for one) and hardware matters a lot for analyzing but maybe not when its playing strength is intentionally downgraded.
yeah the engine i played was about maybe 1800 possibly 1900, but that is being generous. i beat the same type of "2500' engine, supposed to be GM strength, but barely 2000 if that at all.
TheGreatOogieBoogie wrote:
CP6033 wrote:
yes but it's playing strength was not that at all. i played it off an i-pad, so it might not have played as strong....but i doubt it.
My above game was against a Haswell i7 on an SSD and RAM drive (my Motherboard game with a program for one) and hardware matters a lot for analyzing but maybe not when its playing strength is intentionally downgraded.
is see, i guess that could be it.
what was the name of the engine with which you played these 2 games ?
Dec 19, 2013
0
#14
Engines, even particularly strong ones, often consider a draw an acceptable outcome in an even position, and will take the repetition when offered just out of theory, in order to play the objectively best move they find, even if playing a 0.2 worse move would mean the game continues and they steamroll me (or you) later.
I've drawn (using the built-in database, granted) against max-strength HIARCS (advertised as 2950ish) on my iPad a couple of times (to remarkably many losses, granted) for this reason.
it was just a trainer
Dec 19, 2013
0
#16
The problem is not to make the computer better, but to make them worse. How do you make a computer, which plays semioptimal moves in positions, where 1800 players would play them?
Dec 19, 2013
0
#17
DavidStyles wrote:
Engines, even particularly strong ones, often consider a draw an acceptable outcome in an even position, and will take the repetition when offered just out of theory, in order to play the objectively best move they find, even if playing a 0.2 worse move would mean the game continues and they steamroll me (or you) later.
I've drawn (using the built-in database, granted) against max-strength HIARCS (advertised as 2950ish) on my iPad a couple of times (to remarkably many losses, granted) for this reason.
For information, HIARCS has a UCI setting called "Draw Value", which is really just another name for the contempt value. Its range is -100 to +100 (in centipawns), and the default value is 0. If you're not happy with these type of draws, you can change the draw value to some negative value, such as maybe -50, and that might prevent or reduce the draws.
nice, i wonder if i ncan draw it against2000
I played two crazy games against this engine that was supposed to be rated 2300. here are the games.
a simple draw. not at all 2300 level.
game 2
this engine seems messed up, what do you think?