Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 16 Oct '06 23:26
    I got one of em. A littel $20 one.
    I can't win on Level 10.

    1. Just wondering, should I be able to beat it in order to considered a real good chess player?

    I think it will improve my playing with real people (at chessclub) and even here at RedHotPawn.

    2. Lastly, anybody here have similar ccboard I'm talking about and wins!
  2. 16 Oct '06 23:38
    I've not played on one of those boards but I've played against comp programs such as fritz and chessmaster. Never really found them that much fun tbh, chessmaster you'd play people with low rankings and they'd be making moves you'd never see in real life, likewise some of the higher ranking players would make silly mistakes.

    I kinda like the sparring mode in fritz where it plays at a decent level yet makes minor mistakes plus it tells you when you missed it so you can go back and look at it.

    I think long term it'll def improve your game but for me it just isn't the same as beating a real person.
  3. 17 Oct '06 15:33
    I must be doing something better, in my way of thinking during game.
    Seems the games are lasting longer, as in I do not get mated too quick. I seem to make the machine take longer to move, and I feel pretty confident that I see a few moves ahead that it might be trying to do and I block it (so to speak).
    Last night 1 game we both had very littel pieces left.
    Thanks for response.
  4. 17 Oct '06 18:53
    Originally posted by Calhoun
    I got one of em. A littel $20 one.
    I can't win on Level 10.

    1. Just wondering, should I be able to beat it in order to considered a real good chess player?

    I think it will improve my playing with real people (at chessclub) and even here at RedHotPawn.

    2. Lastly, anybody here have similar ccboard I'm talking about and wins!
    When you can beat that Excalibur chess computer, you can be assured you performed at about a 1600+ playing strength in my opinion. Those computers are very cheap though, because the attrition rate is on your side. I wrote Excalibur when I had conquered their hand held e-chess 99.9% of my games with different openings, and they told me that I was about a 1800-1900 player. I beg to differ. A 1800 chess computer in my opinion only performs at about a 1600 rated human level. Humans are much stronger compared to the same rated chess computer. Anyway, let's face it, have they made a computer yet which can work as well as the human brain? No. Never will either.
  5. 19 Oct '06 03:11
    Originally posted by powershaker
    Anyway, let's face it, have they made a computer yet which can work as well as the human brain? No. Never will either.
    Well, it depends on how you define "...can work as well as the human brain." If you mean being able to think abstractly and use reason to modify behavior, then you may be right. But if you mean simply being able to score more points in a chess match, then I would be tempted to disagree.

    Over the last few decades, chess computers have gone from 1000 elo laughingstocks to 2800+ elo monsters, and they continue to improve. We're now at the point where Kramnik is playing Deep Fritz in a few weeks, and Kramnik has admitted publicly that he is the underdog. (Although there is a chance that he could win the match, I wouldn't bet money on Kramnik winning. Also note that many claim that Rybka and Hydra are rated even higher than any version of Fritz.)

    Also, for many years, Kasparov said that chess computers would NEVER be able to beat a human world champion in chess. A year or two ago, I noticed that he'd changed his opinion to say that on his BEST DAY, a human chess champion should still be able to beat a chess computer. I suspect in another 5 to 20 years, Garry will finally have to admit that the days of humans beating the best chess computers in matches has permanently passed.
  6. 19 Oct '06 03:18
    Oh yeah, manufacturers routinely overestimate the ratings of their chess computers. (Can you say "marketing"?) I always mentally subtract 150 to 300 ratings points from any advertised chess computer rating. There are some independent rating lists of dedicated chess computers that are reasonably accurate. Never take a manufacturer's rating as gospel.
  7. 19 Oct '06 18:25 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Mad Rook
    Oh yeah, manufacturers routinely overestimate the ratings of their chess computers. (Can you say "marketing"?) I always mentally subtract 150 to 300 ratings points from any advertised chess computer rating. There are some independent rating lists of dedicated chess computers that are reasonably accurate. Never take a manufacturer's rating as gospel.
    Amen. This is what I was saying. Excalibur had me thinking I had broken 1800, and since I studied Lev Alburt's course fully at the time (taking four months out of my life and studying every day) I thought Excalibur may be right. However, I soon found Lev Alburt says that course I took (the first two volumes) takes you to 1600+, not 1800+. Is it so strange that before all my timeouts, I broke 1600+??? Lev Alburt would know. Alburt says 1600+ and I broke 1600+ on redhotpawn, not using any books or computers, or programs... nothing... but casually moving, hardly ever taking any time to think. Sometimes, playing like blitz even. However, I do think I could have broke 1700 if I had taken a long time on my moves on redhotpawn. But, anyway, I believe those e-chess Excalibur chess computers in radioshack are rated around 1500 ELO. I beat it every time on the highest level, level 72, using King's Gambit, Scotch Game, etc... Keep in mind, this is with the white pieces all the time. So, let's say with the White, I'm 1600+ and e-chess is around 1500. So, yeah, you're correct. Chess computer manufactures overestimate their chess computer's rating for the sake of sales. The e-chess - on the box - is suppose to have an estimated rating of 1700. I will agree, that once in awhile, e-chess plays a strong 1700 tactical game, and ususally I was drawing at that point in the endgames mostly. But, mostly, if you play positionally against e-chess and truly think through the variations, you can crush e-chess if you break 1600+ with Lev Alburt's Comprehensive Chess Course VOlumes 1 and 2. My only lifetime chess goal is to reach 1800 USCF. That's my true goal.

    A side note, if you want a strong computer for a class player, I suggest Mephisto Chess Explorer endorsed my Kasparov. I never beat it in a single game on the highest level. It is a power algorithm, a monster in my opinion for any class player. I put my Mephisto against Chessmaster 9000's Jade (rated slightly above 2200 as I remember), and Mephisto crushed her!

    Oh, another interesting side note, I played the 1800 Josh on Chessmaster 9000 a few times, and a few other 1800 personalities, and usually drew them. This tells me that my accurate prediction of rating strength is right around 1600. Chessmaster 9000 ratings are inflated about 200/300 points. I believe around 250 points of inflation from my experiences. And, if you look at my graph, you can see the 1600 heights I achieved with Lev Alburt's course in Newport, Oregon when I was studying an hour every day and playing one serious game a day. I think anyone who wishes obtain a 1600 strength, should definitely invest in the first two volumes of his course. At the least, if you dedicate your life for a time to those two volumes, you will be a strong little 1500. Just some advice for people wanting get into the 30% of chess players.