On Sep 17, 12:40 am, Sanny wrote:

note: time used, in minutes and seconds, given after each move:

1.Nf3 10:00 d5 :00 2.d4 6:10 Nf6 :00 3.Bg5 18:39

The game was wrong. I find the Opening book was not followed. It
thought for 10 min in opening first move? It always plays opening
moves in 0 seconds. And First 4 moves are opening moves.

Why was opening not played. It means there was something wrong with
loading of program, Otherwise a descent opening would have been played
and it would have tough time for fritz8 once the game started with a
correct opening.

Actually, the first few moves were not to blame here.

1. Nf3 d5
2. d4 Nf6
3. Bg5 Ne4

This is the Trompowski, and it was only when GetClub
played the horrible 4. Qd3 that it got into trouble.

Even so, the sac' on f7 was completely un-called for;
the Knight should have just retreated. Something is
horribly wrong if the program sac's a piece for spite
checks, when there is no substantive attack. Hint:
you cannot conduct an attack by sacrificing the only
piece you have developed, because after the sacrifice,
that piece can attack no more. Duh!


-- help bot

1. Nf3 d5
2. d4 Nf6
3. Bg5 Ne4

This is the Trompowski, and it was only when GetClub
played the horrible 4. Qd3 that it got into trouble.

So the Master was playing correct Opening moves for itself. Thats
good.

Even so, the sac' on f7 was completely un-called for;
the Knight should have just retreated. Something is
horribly wrong if the program sac's a piece for spite
checks, when there is no substantive attack. Hint:
you cannot conduct an attack by sacrificing the only
piece you have developed, because after the sacrifice,
that piece can attack no more. Duh!

Here Kinight had no place to move. If it comes back Knight & Queen get
into fork by pawn. bIf it goes at h3, Then pawn at h4 can be captured
by queen. So always there was a loss of a Pawn.

By taking Pawn at f7, It was 2 points loss. But It took 1 pawn
advantage for King Moved and King cannot do chastling. And the King
defence was broken.

Since for all moves there was a loss of 1 pawn. It descided to
sacrifice knight for a pawn + weakening King ~ 1+1=2 Points having a
loss of 1 point.

So trhe move 4. Q-d3 was wrong. I think Master Level did 8 (half
moves) calculations and could not see the Fork, Incase it has seen
till 9 (half moves) It would not have played Q-d3.

Bye
Sanny.

Play Chess at: http://www.getclub.com/Chess.html

So trhe move 4. Q-d3 was wrong. I think Master Level did 8 (half
moves) calculations and could not see the Fork, Incase it has seen
till 9 (half moves) It would not have played Q-d3.



Sorry, I checked again, it did 9 (half move) calculations and played Q-
d3. If it have done 10(half move) calculations it would have seen the
fork of Queen+Knight at 10th (half) Move.

Bye
Sanny.

Play Chess at:http://www.getclub.com/Chess.html

On Sep 17, 1:40 am, Sanny wrote:
Nonsense. Yesterday afternoon I started a game between your program
and Fritz8. GetClub moved so slowly I could not finish the game until
this morning, but essentially the game was over by the 7th move, when
GetClub threw away a piece for almost nothing, and then played so
idiotically that it lost any chance for compensation. Here is the
game:

So please try again with Opening moves. as this game was not played
with opening book for some reasion.

Sanny, as I said before, I am not wasting any more time with your
silly program. Or on replying to your silly posts.

In rec.games.chess.computer Taylor Kingston wrote:

Sanny, as I said before, I am not wasting any more time with your
silly program. Or on replying to your silly posts.


You just did :-)

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse

We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the
machinations of the wicked.

Sanny, as I said before, I am not wasting any more time with your
silly program. Or on replying to your silly posts.

You just did :-)


Ha Ha Ha what a joke !!!

Bye
Sanny

Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html

On Sep 15, 2:37 am, Sanny wrote:

Yesterday Beginner Level beat a player 4 times and was able to draw a
game with Nomorechess So I think the game play has improved a lot.


Well, if you're referring to the games I lost, you probably shouldn't
be too excited... I'm hardly any measure of a 'good' player. I get
beaten regularly by Chessmaster at the 1600 level

One piece of feedback, though:

Your 'Easy' mode advertises 10-20 second moves... yet in my games, it
regularly took longer than 20 seconds to make a decision.

TrekNoid

Taylor Kingston wrote:
On Sep 17, 1:40 am, Sanny wrote:
Nonsense. Yesterday afternoon I started a game between your program
and Fritz8. GetClub moved so slowly I could not finish the game until
this morning, but essentially the game was over by the 7th move, when
GetClub threw away a piece for almost nothing, and then played so
idiotically that it lost any chance for compensation. Here is the
game:

So please try again with Opening moves. as this game was not played
with opening book for some reasion.

Sanny, as I said before, I am not wasting any more time with your
silly program. Or on replying to your silly posts.


Apparently, you ... mis-spoke ...

--
Kenneth Sloan
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://www.cis.uab.edu/sloan/

On Sep 17, 5:14 pm, Kenneth Sloan wrote:
Taylor Kingston wrote:
On Sep 17, 1:40 am, Sanny wrote:
Nonsense. Yesterday afternoon I started a game between your program
and Fritz8. GetClub moved so slowly I could not finish the game until
this morning, but essentially the game was over by the 7th move, when
GetClub threw away a piece for almost nothing, and then played so
idiotically that it lost any chance for compensation. Here is the
game:

So please try again with Opening moves. as this game was not played
with opening book for some reasion.

Sanny, as I said before, I am not wasting any more time with your
silly program. Or on replying to your silly posts.

Apparently, you ... mis-spoke ...

No, Ken. Unless I have had a memory lapse, the above post was the
first time that I said I would no longer reply to Sanny. Since then I
have not, therefore you and Mr. Veldhouse are mistaken in this regard.
The "as I before" applied to wasting time on his program.

On Sep 17, 3:10 am, Sanny wrote:

1. Nf3 d5
2. d4 Nf6
3. Bg5 Ne4

This is the Trompowski, and it was only when GetClub
played the horrible 4. Qd3 that it got into trouble.

So the Master was playing correct Opening moves for itself. Thats
good.

Even so, the sac' on f7 was completely un-called for;
the Knight should have just retreated. Something is
horribly wrong if the program sac's a piece for spite
checks, when there is no substantive attack. Hint:
you cannot conduct an attack by sacrificing the only
piece you have developed, because after the sacrifice,
that piece can attack no more. Duh!

Here Kinight had no place to move. If it comes back Knight & Queen get
into fork by pawn.

Stop! You have made a simple tactical error in your
analysis. First, although 7. Nh3 is much better for
Black, this is still better than hanging a piece. But the
real flaw in your thinking is much too shallow calculation:

1. Nf3 d5
2. d4 Nf6
3. Bg5 Ne4
4. Qd3 Nxg5
5. Nxg5 e5
6. h4 h6
7. Nf3 e4 (forking two pieces)
8. Qe3!

Both White pieces escape intact. This is a perfect
example of why I keep telling you to focus on tactics.

Do you recall the odds matches where Rybka gave
up a random pawn for nothing against grandmasters
and still managed to win? Tactics; they couldn't
quite handle her tactical skill, even in clearly better
positions where the possibility of counterplay was
severely limited due to the gambit pawn.


bIf it goes at h3, Then pawn at h4 can be captured
by queen. So always there was a loss of a Pawn.

Let's look at this for a moment:

6. h4 h6
7. Nh3 Qxh4
8. dxe5

Now, the tactics are far from over as Black can try
....Qb4+ or ...Nc6, but White is not down anything and
he may be able to castle Queenside very soon, with
counterplay.


By taking Pawn at f7, It was 2 points loss. But It took 1 pawn
advantage for King Moved and King cannot do chastling. And the King
defence was broken.

I see; you give a full pawn for loss of castling rights.
But how do you explain the program *not* taking on e5
after ...Nxf7, Kxf7? That counts as a point, no?


Since for all moves there was a loss of 1 pawn. It descided to
sacrifice knight for a pawn + weakening King ~ 1+1=2 Points having a
loss of 1 point.

So trhe move 4. Q-d3 was wrong. I think Master Level did 8 (half
moves) calculations and could not see the Fork, Incase it has seen
till 9 (half moves) It would not have played Q-d3.

Okay, what we have here is a situation where your chess
program is, perhaps, the only one in existence which does
not use tactical search extensions. I wish I could explain
precisely how they can be implemented, but that is beyond
my abilities. In essence, when in a "quiet position", which
is one where there are no legal checks or captures, you
evaluate positional factors; but when there are checks and/or
captures, you *must* look deeper until you reach a quiet
position, and pass back the position score along the line
to the first move.

If best play for both sides in one line ends in checkmate,
the score for the first move in that line is +1 bazillion points.
If best play leads to the forced win of a pawn, the score for
the first move in that line is +1 point.

As far as I know, the first commercial chess computer,
a portable tabletop model, which made this leap to light
speed was probably the Fidelity Chess Challenger series.
It had by-rote opening moves, tactical search extensions,
and selectable levels from very fast to exceedingly slow,
and its primary weakness was that in simple endgames
the play sped up dramatically because of a fixed depth of
search (a poor idea). That was perhaps in the late 1970s;
you are in this sense, a quarter of a century behind the
curve.


-- help bot