level one still way to hard

I know I am in the minority. But it seems to me that the the difficulty level even at 1 is still incredibly hard. With wins coming few and far between and draws almost never. Any chance of a update to more levels. Like 20 with an easier level 1 that currently exists?

After looking at your rating I think the only program that you may be able to beat is called "Pixlepusher, the world's weakest chess program". Google it and give it a go.

If you cannot beat pixlepusher you should probably give up chess.

Level 1 is rated 400. If you can't beat that then I honestly don't know what to tell you.

You should probably try out the mentor (or lessons in V3) courses rated beginner and you will be able to beat level 1 without trouble..

I agree that level 1 is too advanced , try playing people your own standard, you'll soon gain confidence

1. Learn the Opening Principles:

a. Control the center - d4-e4-d5-e5.

b. Develop your minor pieces toward the center. 

c. Castle.

d. Connect your rooks.

2. tactics...tactics...tactics...

Use chess.com's tactics trainer.  

Use the chessmentor program.

Follow the opening principles.

Before making a move - double check and make sure it doesnt lose a piece.

I agree with Diakonia and LuckyDan.

If you do want to try another chess program, you might try downloading Arena and the Ufim 8.02 engine. At Ufim's lowest setting of 700, it plays a very weak game. (You'll have to install Ufim into Arena as a UCI engine, then configure the engine to the desired elo setting.)

http://www.playwitharena.com/?Download:Arena_3.5.1

https://web.archive.org/web/20140329072350/http://wbec-ridderkerk.nl/html/details1/Ufim.html

Try the nagaskaki chess engine, it has a absolute beginner level.  You can get it right here on chess.com

https://www.chess.com/download/view/nagaskaki-chess

Yeah, that should work, too. A newer version is here:

http://www.mayothi.com/nagaskaki.html

I agree with you citzngold1. It seems to me that if someone knows the basics of controlling the center, developing pieces harmoniously, and suchlike, that it shouldn't be hard to win games on level 1. It's as if chess.com decided that the simplest level should actually be harder than what a smart beginner understands, when in fact common sense suggests that the simplest level should be at the level of a beginner. That way the beginner could get some practice, win a few games, and then advance to the next level for more of a challenge.

But overall I agree with you that it's frustrating that the simplest level is indeed pretty hard...

Level 1 plays like Magnus frikin Carlsen; you simply can't beat it. I've tried nerfing it by playing on my phone; still can't beat it. Any tips?

I just played level 1 for the first time ever to see what you guys were talking about. It hung it's queen on move 3... No joke

But I do like the sense of humor here!!    Obviously I'll keep trying... It's not impossible, but it does seem odd that the easiest level out of 10 plays more advanced than a relatively smart beginner with some knowledge of basics. If it hangs it's Queen on move 3, however, I'm taking it Wayne-Kenoff!!   

I guess Level 1 is just too advanced for me...

 Any level weaker than level 1 would be stuffing its queens and rooks up your fundament.   

Why can't they make and easier level so beginner players like me stand a chance?

I finally managed to draw level 1. It still took all my pieces though.

Here's the pgn...


[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2017.08.15"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Will"]
[Black "Computer Level 1"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

1. e4 Na6 2. Nh3 f6 3. Ng5 fxg5 4. Qg4 b5 5. Qxg5 e6 6. Qh5+ g6 7. Qh6 Rb8
8. Qg7 Ra8 9. Qf6 Bb4 10. Qxh8 Rb8 11. c4 Ba5 12. Nc3 h5 13. Qxh5 Rb6
14. Bd3 Qg5 15. b4 Qc5 16. Ba3 Qxb4 17. Nd5 Rb8 18. Rb1 Qxa3 19. Rb3 c6
20. Nf6+ Ke7 21. Qc5+ Qxc5 22. O-O Qh5 23. g4 Bb4 24. gxh5 Rb6 25. e5 Ba3
26. Bf5 d5 27. exd6+ Kxd6 28. Rb4 gxf5 29. Rfb1 Bc1 30. Rxb5 c5
31. Rxc5 Nb4 32. Rxb4 Rb5 33. Rd5+ Kc6 34. Nd7 Ne7 35. h6 Bb2 36. h7 Ba6
37. h8=B Ng8 38. Rxf5 Bd4 39. Re5 Ne7 40. c5 Ra5 41. Nb6 Kc7 42. Kg2 Bxc5
43. Bg7 Kd6 44. Bh6 Bd4 45. Bf4 Bc5 46. Be3 Rxa2 47. d3 Nd5 48. Kg3 Ra4
49. f3 Bxb4 50. Kg4 Ra3 51. Kg5 Bc4 52. Kg6 a6 53. Bc5+ Kxe5 54. Bd4+ Kxd4
55. Nxd5 Ba2 56. h3 Bd6 57. h4 e5 58. h5 Bc7 59. Nb4 Bf7+ 60. Kg5 a5
61. h6 Kc3 62. Kf6 Ra4 63. h7 axb4 64. h8=N Ra7 65. Ng6 Kd2 66. Nxe5 Ra2
67. f4 Ke3 68. f5 Be6 69. fxe6 Re2 70. e7 Bb6 71. e8=B Bc5 72. d4 Kd2
73. Ng4 Ba7 74. Nf2 Re5 75. Kg6 Rg5+ 76. Kf6 Rb5 77. d5 Be3 78. Kf5 Rb6
79. d6 Kc1 80. Kg4 Bc5 81. Kg3 b3 82. Ne4 Bxd6+ 83. Kf2 Bc5+ 84. Kg3 Bb4
85. Nd6 Kd2 86. Nb5 Rb8 87. Nd4 Ba5 88. Nc6 Rd8 89. Na7 Rd5 90. Nc6 Kc2
91. Ne5 Rxe5 92. Ba4 Rf5 93. Bb5 b2 94. Kg2 Kb1 95. Kg3 Rf4 96. Kg2 Bc3
97. Kg3 Rc4 98. Kf3 Bd4 99. Ke2 Ra4 100. Kd2 Ra8 101. Kd1 Bg1 102. Be8 Rd8+
103. Bd7 Ka2 104. Kc2 Bd4 105. Kd3 Ka1 106. Ke4 Rxd7 107. Kf5 Rd6
108. Ke4 Bf2 109. Ke5 Rd5+ 110. Kxd5 Bg3 111. Ke4 b1=Q+ 112. Kf3 Bc7
113. Kg4 Bf4 114. Kf3 Qh1+ 115. Kxf4 Qc6 116. Ke5 Qd6+ 117. Kf5 Qd8
118. Kg6 Qd6+ 119. Kg7 Qh2 120. Kg8 Qh4 121. Kf8 Qh3 122. Ke7 Qb3
123. Kf8 Qa2 124. Kg7 Qc4 125. Kf6 Qc2 126. Ke5 Ka2 127. Kd4 Qc1
128. Kd3 Qa3+ 129. Kc2 Qe3 130. Kd1 Qg1+ 131. Kc2 Ka1 132. Kb3 Qe3+
133. Kc2 Qg5 134. Kd1 Qa5 135. Kc1 Qb4 136. Kc2 Qb1+ 137. Kd2 Qc1+
138. Ke2 Qh1 139. Kf2 Qb1 140. Ke2 Qf1+ 141. Kd2 Qf2+ 142. Kd3 Ka2
143. Kc3 Qg2 144. Kb4 Qc2 145. Kb5 Qc6+ 146. Kb4 Qf3 147. Ka5 Qe4
148. Kb5 Ka3 149. Ka5 Qb1 150. Ka6 Qb8 151. Ka5 Qb3 152. Ka6 Qd3+
153. Ka5 Qe2 154. Kb6 Qe8 155. Ka5 Qe3 156. Ka6 Qc3 157. Ka7 Ka2
158. Ka6 Qe3 159. Ka5 Qh3 160. Ka4 Qd7+ 161. Ka5 Qb5+ 162. Kxb5 1/2-1/2

I'm guessing you're not a beginner, Oregonpatzer. So for myself I fully admit that I'm basically a beginner and pretty bad (although I used to be decent about 20 years ago when I would play fellow students first at Michigan State and then at Vanderbilt [grad school] and beat most of them). But I know some basics, used to be a decent player in the casual sense, and I'm not entirely dumb (evidenced, I hope, by a Ph.D.). Yet it's clear to me that level 1, the easiest of the easiest, is programmed with better play compared to a real beginner, as it seems to follow, albeit badly for someone in the know like you, the openings---and it's obvious that beginners, by definition, don't know the openings more than 1% or so.

Anyway, I'm not really here to complain about it. It's a fun challenge and hopefully I'll start beating it. But I do think that it would be nice if Chess.com provided a level for real beginners with no knowledge of openings or what "hanging" means---as that would be fun for them and perhaps they would stick around long enough to start climbing more levels.

Cool to hear about the draw, BeepBeep!!!