09 Jul 07
Are there any free engines with an adjustable level of strength (and not just from IM to GM rating, something that would simulate a club player) I could hook up to winboard and play against, or with a client program of their own? I was told that one of the best ways to improve was to play players say 50 to 100 points better than yourself consistently so your mistakes would get punished but you still have a reasonable chance to win, so you learn to be solid and not make speculative sacs. Is this a good way to train?
11 Jul 07
Originally posted by pwnguinNo, it is not. better create an account on some chess server and play there against humans. Playing against computers gives bad habits.
Are there any free engines with an adjustable level of strength (and not just from IM to GM rating, something that would simulate a club player) I could hook up to winboard and play against, or with a client program of their own? I was told that one of the best ways to improve was to play players say 50 to 100 points better than yourself consistently so your ...[text shortened]... nce to win, so you learn to be solid and not make speculative sacs. Is this a good way to train?
- Joined
- 21 Jun 06
- Moves
- 82236
11 Jul 07
Originally posted by diskamylI don't like chessmaster 10 as an opponent to play with. One of the reasons is that it's openingbook doesn't hadle transposions, fe. after 1.e4 c5 2.c3 e6 3.d4 d5 4.e5 we've reached a normal french adv. var. ML, wich chessmaster only knows from 1.e4 e6. Therefore every version of fritz is much better. I think the Fritz 8 (a program I use myself sometimes) can be found at a very low cost cause it's a couple of years old! Good luck.
it's not free, but ChessMaster 10 is just the thing you're looking for.
11 Jul 07
3 edits
I disagree vipiu. I despise computer chess programs, but all the same I don't think it's fair to discourage other players from using them based on personal experiences. On the contrary playing against a program could initiate some very good habits, it just depends on the player.
11 Jul 07
For novices and players playing below club level CMX is good enough for those wanting to develop tactical strength. It's opening book and overall strategic knowledge is weak, but they won't need that knowledge till they at least get their tactical skills honed and stop dropping pieces and other blunders.
11 Jul 07
1 edit
Originally posted by artplayerI went from 1500 to 1800+ USCF after getting a Fidelity Elite Avant Garde table top chess computer and playing it every day for a year. Playing once a week at the chess club wasn't enough practice. (This was in 1985, before the internet was around)
I disagree vipiu. I despise computer chess programs, but all the same I don't think it's fair to discourage other players from using them based on personal experiences. On the contrary playing against a program could initiate some very good habits, it just depends on the player.
It taught me how to play ACCURATELY, with no blunders.
11 Jul 07
2 edits
Originally posted by clarencecuasaythat's a huge underestimation. I think CMX is good enough from 800 to GM strength. remember even CM9, many years ago has beaten GM Larry Christiansen very convincingly.
For novices and players playing below club level CMX is good enough for those wanting to develop tactical strength. It's opening book and overall strategic knowledge is weak, but they won't need that knowledge till they at least get their tactical skills honed and stop dropping pieces and other blunders.
12 Jul 07
Originally posted by Sam The ShamACCURATELY ?
I went from 1500 to 1800+ USCF after getting a Fidelity Elite Avant Garde table top chess computer and playing it every day for a year. Playing once a week at the chess club wasn't enough practice. (This was in 1985, before the internet was around)
It taught me how to play ACCURATELY, with no blunders.
and with fear of complications and trying to avoid tactic positions?
with some sucky style of trying to keep the position closed and trading as much as possible?
as this is year 2007, just go and create some account on some server and play HUMANS. If you play OTB later, you WILL play HUMANS, not computers...
12 Jul 07
2 edits
Originally posted by vipiuoh yeah, "as this is year 2007", computer programs don't play with "sucky" styles, they're not simple calculators anymore. try to "exchange all pieces and close the position" against a CM personality at your level in 10 games and see what happens. that technique started failing against computers many years ago.
ACCURATELY ?
and with fear of complications and trying to avoid tactic positions?
with some sucky style of trying to keep the position closed and trading as much as possible?
as this is year 2007, just go and create some account on some server and play HUMANS. If you play OTB later, you WILL play HUMANS, not computers...
I loved this "didactic and socratic" posting style of yours, but have to say you're completely wrong. sorry.
12 Jul 07
Originally posted by diskamylI did not say that computers have sucky style...I was saying the human playing mostly against a computer will get a sucky style...which will not work so well against humans...
oh yeah, "as this is year 2007", computer programs don't play with "sucky" styles, they're not simple calculators anymore. try to "exchange all pieces and close the position" against a CM personality at your level in 10 games and see what happens. that technique started failing against computers many years ago.
I loved this "didactic and socratic" posting style of yours, but have to say you're completely wrong. sorry.