Why not just play other people near your strength online?
Playing vs. chess engine
Sort:
Sep 21, 2012
0
#3
This is a fascinating OP. It is something that's occurred to me as well. I haven't tried it. I guess that you have a number of options for giving the engine a bit of a handicap:
1. taking away its opening book
2. taking away any endgame tablebase
3. time
4. allowing yourself one takeback in the game. To me this is a bit cheesy. But it is an option.
5. Making the engine play its second best move unless that would be an outright blunder as in a forced recapture.
I am probbaly about the same level - if I played otb at long time controls I would be 1800ish FIDE. I can beat engines set to 2000 without any handicap. But above 2100 without any handicap I lose all the games.
A subtle drawback to the time handicap is that the engine also gains from it because you don't get the thinking time of the opponent in which you get to think. It is also a very unnatural "move rythym" for a human being.
It sounds interesting.
@scottrf: I might end up doing that. But the pros are:
* I can "pausing" the game while playing (because the kids demand my attention :D)
* The fact that I can get a game exactly when I want and with the given timecontrol (long game 1hour/40 moves) and vs. an opponent with strength close to mine.
Sep 21, 2012
0
#5
You will soon find that instant replies by the opponent really makes the experience a lot worse than playing against an opponent who takes normal amounts of time. It will affect you a lot and cut off an entire half of regular playing circumstances, which consists in organizing your thoughts when your opponent's clock is ticking.
I would really recommend you to get Shredder Classic (not the one that comes with chessbase), the engine's level is adjustable to any level from beginner to GM and can immitate those human levels very realistically, you certainly won't feel like you're playing against a computer who sacs a bishop on h6 on move 3 and plays the rest of the game like Kramnik to immitate a Class A player. It is the best in that department. It can also give you a GM level game if you play against its highest strength. It also gives you a rating estimation of your level (not based only your results against it, but the accuracy of your moves.)
Long story short => I cannot participate in online or "real-life" tournements for the next half year or so. I still want to play chess though.
So I am considering playing vs engines. My plan is to play at standard time controls (not blitz - more like 1 hour/40 moves for me). I want to give myself time-odds so that I actually have a chance of winning.
I have downloaded houdini 1.5a and winboard.
First game I will have 1 hour for 40 moves and houdini will have 2 seconds for 40 moves.
I think my rating is around 1800 FIDE (I have not played long enough for my rating to stabalize).
If I get 2 wins vs. houdini at that time-odds setting I will increase houdinis time.
So my plan is to find a level for houdini that is better than mine - but still beatable - so like 1900 FIDE i guess.
...Now I wonder:
1) Have anyone made experiments that could define houdinis strength as a function of nodes-pr-second or depth for instance (variables that are not depending on hardware configuration)?
2) Have anyone tried this approach? I wonder if it will work at all. Sounds great on paper :D
...ofcause it does not "have" to be houdini...