lichess.org
Donate

I figured out how to beat bots.

#1
Make safe, positional moves. Do not try to complicate the position to make them blunder. They don't get confused by complexity. They blunder when a move counter tells them it is time to blunder. So play good, simple moves and watch for the blunder. Once you win a piece, watch out for their sneakiness.

I almost beat Antonio. I had to think about each move at least 30 seconds, some a minute or so. Normally I play like it is a 10 minute game. This time I made fewer mistakes and saw the dropped piece. But Antonio got me with a sneaky, non forced back rank checkmate.

That bot is not 1500. But I don't mind. Maybe as strong as a 1500 at classical time controls. I can beat the 1600 bot most of the time with far less effort. It likes going to endgames, and I'm pretty good at endgames.
#2
Yeah, bots don't like positional games that much. They also are not a fan of the Hippo, a very slow and positional Opening. Maybe that is the reason why we "understand" open games so fast and have struggles with closed positions? I mean, if a database-computer struggles, we should struggle even more, right?
#3
I just finished looking at the score sheet against Antonio. The piece I won was by removing a defender. It did not do a simple hang. Its other blunders were failing to execute 5 move combinations that would have won an exchange or a pawn. Most of my mistakes were failing to kick a piece off a good square, or allowing a knight to trade itself for my bishop. The ! moves were just forced recaptures, since failing to take back would be several points lower.

As for the mating threat, had I seen it, my response would have been a positional blundering, requiring me to retreat a doubled 7th rank rook to save my king. The engine said the best save was to give up a lawn in front of my king so no mate is possible.

I also noticed that often the best move alternative to a mistake I made was one I considered extensively but dismissed because I'd lose a pawn. But that pawn was going to be lost regardless.
#4
@Chesserroo2 said in #1:
> Make safe, positional moves. Do not try to complicate the position to make them blunder. They don't get confused by complexity. They blunder when a move counter tells them it is time to blunder. So play good, simple moves and watch for the blunder. Once you win a piece, watch out for their sneakiness.
>
> I almost beat Antonio. I had to think about each move at least 30 seconds, some a minute or so. Normally I play like it is a 10 minute game. This time I made fewer mistakes and saw the dropped piece. But Antonio got me with a sneaky, non forced back rank checkmate.
>
> That bot is not 1500. But I don't mind. Maybe as strong as a 1500 at classical time controls. I can beat the 1600 bot most of the time with far less effort. It likes going to endgames, and I'm pretty good at endgames.
Get REady to beat stockfish.
#5
@MasterOvFan said in #4:
> Get REady to beat stockfish.

Stockfish is not programmed to make bad moves periodically. To beat stockfish, adding complexity might not hurt.
#6
@Chesserroo2 said in #1:
[...]
> That bot is not 1500. But I don't mind. Maybe as strong as a 1500 at classical time controls. I can beat the 1600 bot most of the time with far less effort. It likes going to endgames, and I'm pretty good at endgames.

Not everybody knows who "Antonio" is - a little bit more context would be nice...

So... For all those, who don't know which bots we are takling about => It's the bots on chess.com (play a game against the computer).

Imo the bot rating numbers are totally nonsense and can't really be compared to "real life" (the same is true for lichess, too btw.).
What i can say from my own experience is that the bot Li (showing a rating of 2000) must be definitely much less than 1500 ELO FIDE, otherwise i wouldn't win 8 out of 10 matches against it.

Have fun!
#9
Computers generally do computer things really well and humans do human things really well
#10
To win a bot you must buy a bot, get it?

So winning a bot (means winning something) you can taks part of the lottery.

Logic.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.