Originally posted by ShinidokiI just recall reading that Kasp. Checkmate was rated at 1700 on this website with a whole bunch of chess programs. I'm not sure which version it was, maybe one of the earlier ones but i'm pretty sure thats what I read. The list was made in 2002 I believe, but the programs were older than that.
If your asking which Version kas. Chessmate uses I was unable to find out.... - the "credits" don't give specific details and I couldn't find any reliable documentation on the Web --- Even Ruffian's site doesn't mention anything....
Originally posted by RahimKRuffian Is a LOT MORE powerful than 1700.....
I just recall reading that Kasp. Checkmate was rated at 1700 on this website with a whole bunch of chess programs. I'm not sure which version it was, maybe one of the earlier ones but i'm pretty sure thats what I read. The list was made in 2002 I believe, but the programs were older than that.
Its about 2400 with long time controls, even more deadly at blitz....
And thats including the fact it has a crap opening book...
1 edit
The thing that bugs me the most about Chessmaster is the guys below 2150 make unsound sacrifices. Free pieces! How can we turn of this stupidity? Wally even thinks his Queen is worth a Rook!
And the game should do something about Chessmaster Personality ratings. The accuracy is way off. As a 1560 ELO player I could easily beat those under 2200 and could manage draws with those with 2300-2350 ratings. It gave me such a false impression on my strength that I got beaten silly by "weaker" people I met in clubs when I mentioned my virtual rating.
And Josh Age 12 was supposed to be good in endgames...
Edit: For reference purpose (especially Ubisoft staff, it was run on P4 2.2MHz, Some GeForce 4, 256MB or ram, and lots of hard disk space).
Originally posted by Papyn ChaseUnder their personalities I think you can change how much they value each peices?
The thing that bugs me the most about Chessmaster is the guys below 2150 make unsound sacrifices. Free pieces! How can we turn of this stupidity? Wally even thinks his Queen is worth a Rook!
And the game should do something about Chessmaster Personality ratings. The accuracy is way off. As a 1560 ELO player I could easily beat those under 2200 and cou ...[text shortened]... ft staff, it was run on P4 2.2MHz, Some GeForce 4, 256MB or ram, and lots of hard disk space).
Not sure but I think it was possible for CM8000. It's been a long time since I used CM though.
Wally will take a rook with his queen is supposed to be his playing style personality? ChessMaster tried to program computer generated personalities? Truely they have never programed a GM's playing style. Petrosian should be programed too play a passive defensive style that plays a game to a draw until his opponent plays a mistake? Reshevsky should use most of his time in the opening. Korchnoi should play a highly aggressive counter attacking style. Korchnoi should be unbeatable in a double rook ending? Capablanca should be able to play through the complications of the middle game no matter what moves are played. GM's learn from their mistakes. No program can give thier GM personality that ability. Your ChessMaster rateing is what? Consider it your ChessMaster rateing.
Originally posted by exigentskyexigentsky, I have discovered that the blitz ratings on Chessmaster programs are not accurate, as you also have discovered. However, I have found that if you set the virtual player games to 40 minute times or better, they are exactly on the money. For example, I took my Mephisto Chess Explorer (stand alone) - rated 2080 USCF or 1880 ELO - and put it (and it's strong let me tell you; crushes me every time) against 2200 Jade on Chessmaster 9000 at 40 minutes plus. Though it was a struggle and the game last past 150 moves, Jade was able to break down Mephisto. The game was totally awesome! You could just feel the forces of each computer mind. The game was unbelievable long, but in the end Jade won. SHe was rated around 2200. Now, since the game last 150+ moves, I'll say that any CHessmaster rating on 9000 or higher in an 1 and 20 minute game will play at exactly the strength it says within 100 points. I've tested the virtual personalities against several different chess computers. For instance, I took my Excalibur e-chess from Radioshack (rated around 1700 USCF) and put it up against the 1700 T.C. personality. I also used a 10 minute time frame, and let e-chess think as long as it wanted. It was a long wait, but eventually T.C. won. Now, what i think is this... since it's vastly complex... and what I have learned is that Chessmaster ratings are only based on the USCF ratings of other "computers!" After all my dabbling in amateur chess computer research, I have discovered that human opponents of the same rating as a chess computer are around 100 to 200 points stronger due to one common trait: INTUITION, INSTINCT and CREATIVITY. If a human plays his best game - thinking through his moves and using his common sense ideas in chess - it's easy for him to beat a computer rated his same strength. A 1700 human rated opponent can blow away a 1700 rated computer. I've tested this fact, and it's true. Technology is still just not able at present to implement a correct strategy that can duplicate with utmost precision the play of a true 1700 rated opponent. One has to take in to account that a player often can play 100 to 200 points or more above his true strength. He may be happy that day. Clear headed. He may be just in a chess frame of mind. Another day, he may play at 1500, but his true strength is 1700. All of these things you have to take into account. Chessmaster ratings are only based on how Chessmaster 9000 or 10000 played against other USCF rated chess computers. Computer versus computer is a different world of chess. It's pure calculable ability - nothing more. There is no creativity. Only depth. There is no imagination. Only logic. Interestingly enough, I have come to realize that the beauty of chess does not reside in the idea of winning or losing. Aesthetically speaking, chess truly communicates the players' individuality to such a degree that a chess computer - I do not believe - will ever duplicate human rating strength accurately until it succumbs to the knowledge that the human mind itself must be duplicated in a technological fashion. Even then, how far does our emotion and intuition become involved with our creative endeavors like in chess? If Bobby Fischer was truly correct - and if chess is truly art in its core - then there is no hope of ever arriving at a truly accurate chess rating for a chess computer in comparison to humans. If you beat a 1700 chess computer, you have beaten a cold, emotionless calculator who calculates about as well as a 1700 player, but never is infused with the inspiration required for a 6 move deep combination of glory. Sometimes, a human player can feel inspired, and this can raise their level of play to degree beyond their true strengths.
I've just started playing a few games in Chessmaster and have yet to lose any. Right now I'm at 2025 and I've just beaten Rusty. Now, I really doubt that I'm THAT good, as much as I would like to believe it. For example, here is my game against Rusty (I was black):
[Event "Chessmaster 10th Edition Rated Game"]
[Site ""]
[Date "2006.3.22"]
[Round ""] ...[text shortened]... nk CM's ratings are to real ratings and what are your own ratings in CM?
For example: An experiment was performed with GM TAL. A hypnotist hypnotized a player to think he was Paul Morphy. He was merely an amateur before hypnosis. Then, Tal played a few games with the hypnotized player, and the player ended up drawing Tal once and losing twice. But, Tal said the player played beautifully! If it hadn't been Tal, he probably would have crushed most players.
Once there was also another experiment, one group was allowed to look at a picture of Paul Morphy every day for a certain number of days. They were just amateur chess players. THe other group studied chess all day every day for a time. The players who observed the picture of Paul Morphy defeated the anti-MOrphy players. How? Inspiration! So, this goes to show a muse is greater than a book!
Originally posted by powershakerInteresting powershaker. So if I play Chessmaster at 40 minutes time controls, I should get a pretty accurate assessment. I'll do just that.
exigentsky, I have discovered that the blitz ratings on Chessmaster programs are not accurate, as you also have discovered. However, I have found that if you set the virtual player games to 40 minute times or better, they are exactly on the money. For example, I took my Mephisto Chess Explorer (stand alone) - rated 2080 USCF or 1880 ELO - and put it (a ...[text shortened]... y players. How? Inspiration! So, this goes to show a muse is greater than a book!
As for the hypnosis stuff, I find it hard to believe that just thinking you are some super grandmaster will bring your game up to GM level. If that worked, why don't we all do that and become GMs? I agree that it may help you not to lose hope and to play your best but, I doubt it coud really improve one's game that much. If this worked, you know I would try it. 😉
Originally posted by exigentskyActually, it does work! But, I don't believe in hypnosis, because it's a sin according to my faith. However, if you want to see a hypnosis and let him make you believe you are Bobby Fischer or Paul Morphy, then go ahead. Ask him to test the point, and write the games down. You'll play like a Master or better - most likely. Oddly enough, your brain already knows how to play at grandmaster strength. It's just your conscious brain hasn't the ability. If you could tap into the powers of your subconscious, you would be able to reach the full power of the human brain. We only use 6% of our brain power roughly. Some a little more or a little less. This is why many autistic people can play piano like Beethoven, yet they can't even tie their own shoes or take a bath. The mind is extremely powerful. In every dummie lives a genius, believe or not. So, test my point. Go to a hypnotist if you don't feel guilty about it. Get him to hypnotize you, and then have a doctor there of course. Then, get a true grandmaster to play you in a room. It would be interesting experience. But, I suggest making sure you write the games down under hypnosis. But, if you believe you're Bobby Fischer, I think the psychiatrist can hand you a pen and some paper, and say to you, "Okay, Bobby, write your games down. Here's your pen and paper." I must note that you must already know who Bobby Fischer is upon taking the experiement. And, I also would choose a GRandmaster that you truly look up to and admire for their brilliancies. It would be more inspirational. The games you play will be so good you won't believe you played the moves.
Interesting powershaker. So if I play Chessmaster at 40 minutes time controls, I should get a pretty accurate assessment. I'll do just that.
As for the hypnosis stuff, I find it hard to believe that just thinking you are some super grandmaster will bring your game up to GM level. If that worked, why don't we all do that and become GMs? I agree that it ...[text shortened]... oubt it coud really improve one's game that much. If this worked, you know I would try it. 😉
Originally posted by exigentskyBefore playing in my OTB tournament, Jan/Feb 8 rounds every thursday, I told me self I was just as good as everyone else.
Interesting powershaker. So if I play Chessmaster at 40 minutes time controls, I should get a pretty accurate assessment. I'll do just that.
As for the hypnosis stuff, I find it hard to believe that just thinking you are some super grandmaster will bring your game up to GM level. If that worked, why don't we all do that and become GMs? I agree that it ...[text shortened]... oubt it coud really improve one's game that much. If this worked, you know I would try it. 😉
7/8 clear first with a draw against and expert who was 300 points above me.
Mind games I tell ya.
1 edit
Originally posted by RahimKI've heard chess is 50% confidence... the rest knowledge and skill. Josh Waitzkin has said confidence is everything in chess. You must be confident or you don't have a chance in competitive chess. I read about an 1100 player who went into a rated USCF tournament and ended up winning the whole thing against 1800 caliber players. They asked him how he did it. EVeryone was amazed. Confidence. He told himself it was possible. I think anyone can play at an 1800 strength on a good day. Class strength is possible once in a blue moon. To maintain an 1800 rating though is another thing.
Before playing in my OTB tournament, Jan/Feb 8 rounds every thursday, I told me self I was just as good as everyone else.
7/8 clear first with a draw against and expert who was 300 points above me.
Mind games I tell ya.
Originally posted by powershakerLOL, you know, if I could afford hiring a hypnotist and grandmaster, I would definitely try that. It sounds fun. However, the idea that we only use 6%, or 10% of our brains is definitely not one rooted in science. I don't know why people keep repeating this.
Actually, it does work! But, I don't believe in hypnosis, because it's a sin according to my faith. However, if you want to see a hypnosis and let him make you believe you are Bobby Fischer or Paul Morphy, then go ahead. Ask him to test the point, and write the games down. You'll play like a Master or better - most likely. Oddly enough, your brain a ...[text shortened]... ational. The games you play will be so good you won't believe you played the moves.
Originally posted by powershakerHmmm I played them at that time limit and more and I those below 2150 play just as horrible. I even have a healthy clock than they do.
exigentsky, I have discovered that the blitz ratings on Chessmaster programs are not accurate, as you also have discovered. However, I have found that if you set the virtual player games to 40 minute times or better, they are exactly on the money. For example, I took my Mephisto Chess Explorer (stand alone) - rated 2080 USCF or 1880 ELO - and put it (a ...[text shortened]... y players. How? Inspiration! So, this goes to show a muse is greater than a book!
Has anybody heard of people who has done adjustments to their own Chessmaster game's personalities. I would like to know how much they increased the playing strength, and material and positional assessments. It really disappoints me to be virtua 2300 when we're just a lowly 1560 elo.
I'm not obsessed about ratings. It's just that I set it as a standard bar. If it goes down, there muct be more hard work. If it stays around for a few years, we might not be studying properly. And if it goes up it takes the worries away =D
Originally posted by exigentskyIf I remember correctly there was some guy with 12 different personalities. One of them is a boxer and could beat anybody up when he comes out. Funny thing is the guy never learned any boxing!
Interesting powershaker. So if I play Chessmaster at 40 minutes time controls, I should get a pretty accurate assessment. I'll do just that.
As for the hypnosis stuff, I find it hard to believe that just thinking you are some super grandmaster will bring your game up to GM level. If that worked, why don't we all do that and become GMs? I agree that it ...[text shortened]... oubt it coud really improve one's game that much. If this worked, you know I would try it. 😉