Some Idle thoughts on Chess Computers and Humans.

This forum is for general discussions and questions, including Collectors Corner and anything to do with Computer chess.

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
paulhuk
Member
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 7:18 pm

Post by paulhuk »

Hi Guys, excellent posts by the way. Very interesting and biographical.

Steve B Wrote

i was just about to post a brilliant game of mine against this powerhouse dedicated computer
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10261668@N05/858185245/


Most amusing Steve. Actually, the Micky Mouse level of play is also dear to my heart.

Returning to the issue of not posting ones own games, verification is an important problem. In my case however, it feels more emotional and anxiety provoking. I am definitely on the same page as Reinfeld here. I said to myself, 'come on Paul put your money where your mouth is and post a game.' I immediately felt a tension in the pit of my stomach...who would want to wade through my amateurish attempts at play and what would people say? Stuff like...

'here white blunders badly for the third time in a row and its only now that Mephisto, temporarily escaping its easy level restrictions, delivers the 'cu de gras' mating attack and not before time...a regular comedy of errors up to this point etc, etc...

To combat this horror show, I would have to attempt a deep analysis of the game and annotate it in such a way as to preempt the above, by which time I would probably have lost the will to live let alone play chess.

Regarding my own passage through to computer chess. I started playing at age 8 years after watching a black and white teaching program on BBC 2. It demonstrated all the moves and captured my young imagination. I then persuaded my father to teach me and for years based my opening moves on the 4 move checkmate scam. I even managed a place on the school team using this ruse. After a gap of about 5 years, I returned to chess at 6th form collage and played in the local chess club. Around this time I came into a small inheritance of about £700 which burned a hole in my adolescent pocket. So shortly after in 1977, I visited Harrods where I fell in love with the new Sargon 2.5 Auto-response chess board and I had to have it. It was about £650 at the time...perfect. If only I'd invested the money in Microsoft but that's another story. I thoroughly enjoyed playing Sargon on its level 3 setting and had many enthralling battles. The interesting thing about Sargon is that when the material goes below 18 you can pop the strength up to its tournament level 4 to improve the end game without it taking an age to respond. I only became dissatisfied when, many years later, a good friend of mine came round with a cheep plastic looking board called TurboKing and effectively bludgeoned poor Sargon to death. Hmmmm.

I think it was around this time I struck up a telephone relationship with Eric Hallsworth. He worked for Countrywide Computers and was THE most enthusiastic and knowledgeable computer chess officionardo I have ever had the pleasure of talking with. An all round great guy and I subscribed to Selective Search for many years obsessing over the relative strengths and weaknesses of the different tabletops. I bought my Mephisto Lyon 16 bit Exclusive board complete with leather case from Eric and spent many difficult and struggle ridden hours having my head torn off by the darned thing. To my credit I did managed to get up to about 5 seconds a move with probably about 70% of the wins going to the Lyon.

My life then changed abruptly with the unexpected arrival of triplets and the Lyon was consigned to the under stairs cupboard for many years. It has only been in the last few years that 'the beast' has emerged blinking into the cold light of day. The trouble is, it doesn't seem to have changed much??? On the other hand my chess knowledge is rusty and my skill levels at a low ebb, hence easy level 6 :oops: I am currently drooling over Ruud Martins Revelation II and can't make up my mind whether to go for this bad boy or the gold module or both in order to really emasculate myself.

Decisions decisions regards,

Paul H
User avatar
IA
Member
Posts: 433
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 1:12 pm
Location: Spain

Post by IA »

Very interesting the views of all, I started when I was 10 years at the school, at that time and leisure activities were conducted during breaks one of my best classmates that area the smartest in the class taught me to play chess, I learned later but my passion for the game was on the rise over the years.

My only contact with chess was classmates with many contesting chess boards small pocket in one year a teacher was put in place to get sick a teacher and this class let us be playing, so we spent much of the year playing chess at mealtimes and playtime, an average of 1 hour long day playing against different classmates, eventually I got better a bit and I pointed to all activities and competitions chess school and then high school, not win any competitions but I liked chess nevertheless, never step my level Class E of about +1200 Elo at that time, whenever he had occasion disputed chess games with all friends and fellow students, the truth is much enjoyed playing at that time, then came the fever by fighting between Karpov and Kasparov still further aroused my interest in this noble sport when Kaspov - Karparov came to Spain (Sevilla 1987) and at the time I started looking chess equipment but my budget was small and the only thing I could afford at that time was a "Saitek Partner" purchased in a department store with my mother, it was me who said I wanted the machine, in I never gave my case a machine, of course when you get to the department store looked admiringly Novag machines as Novag Supremo - Novag Super Forte B -C, but I could not afford a more expensive machine, so I had to settle for this simple computer .

I spent several years playing and analyzing games with the Saitek Partner board, came a time when it was beginning to make some money and I could afford something better and by the time I bought the Emerald Novag with enough effort, also played with the PC with programs like ChessMaster 2100 and ChessMaster 3000 that had a too strong for me, I eventually buying me many chess programs Fritz, Hiarcs, Shredder, Pocket Fritz .... and continued to participate in tournaments with colleagues and friends occasionally , just improve my chess a lot in these years.

My big jump in elo came when I bought Palm Hiarcs 9.7 in 2007, Palm Hiarcs buy it because I always liked how he played the PC version, I played a lot and analyzed with Hiarcs 7.32, but thanks to Palm Hiarcs and their levels reach the mythical barrier +2000 Elo, for me this program is a blessing and my favorite.

I have had several machines Novag chess, Mephisto, Saitek helped my play and have a good time, I personally think that the best thing to play the are micros dedicated and programs like pocket, Palm Hiarcs, Pocket Fritz ..... and then analyzing the entries in the PC.

My approach has always been that these machines have to help you improve, they have to have realistic game levels for humans to adapt to all levels of force and must also simulate as closely as possible to the playing style of human it makes little sense to have a motor like Houdini 1.5 if you can not regulate it and does not show a more human behavior why would you want to have +3200 Elo?

What I liked chess when I started in my youth were heading sparkling playing against my fellow students, and this is not met again until they appeared machines Novag Risc 32K and Palm Hiarcs when I came back my want to improve and have fun with chess, which is why it is so important to the style of game machines and humanized in this point is really what makes the difference, the machines now play chess better and better simulate game style Chess Players Club, you have to move you when you play or you can leave the chess, now what happens is that chess programs are so strong that it is as if you were faced with a friend who has over 300 Elos that u in the end abandoned by boredom, luckily there are still Dedicated Micros and machines that can adjust playing strength.

In my case I like to build machines, I have only you use and the more I like his style of play, I sold very good machine but could not win, you do not see the point, I assimilate but the final cost is better than others enjoy those machines that leave them hidden in a closet, I always prefer things simple and inexpensive and I think machines like Mephisto Admiral or Novag Risc 32K, They are inexpensive and are perfect for players of Club What else?

The curious thing is that 20-30 years ago that we started in the world of dedicated micros we began with machines that had a club player force from 1000 to 1500 Elo, now kids can have computers +3200 Elo, the difference is overwhelming Playlands force is so great that many children may collapse and bored with chess before, hopefully this will not happen for the sake of chess, luckily there are good programmers who do a good job in adapting its programs to all categories of players.

PD: Today paradoxically have to reverse the formula, for years tried to humanize humans to machines, but the machines currently you have to judge how to humanize humans, just have to see how the best players play chess nothing to do with the romantic chess for years.

Regards... :D
Reinfeld
Member
Posts: 486
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 3:54 am
Location: Tacoma, WA

Post by Reinfeld »

Some more bio stuff on this deeply geeky topic:

While the Excellence machine was the first tabletop I purchased in the mid-80s, it's possible that I picked up the Fidelity Mini-Sensory Chess Challenger first. I can't remember how I got it, but I remember playing it in the early days and being soundly beaten, which was humiliating. I discovered takebacks. I recall jacking up the levels to see how it worked - there were three or four, the last being the infinite setting. When I picked up Excellence, I gradually set the mini aside. That was when I first noticed that the mini would play certain inexplicable moves when at a loss (the rook back and forth between h8 and g8, for example) I did not know until decades later, when I joined this forum, that you could buy opening modules for the thing, which was an enormous hoot (I'm still looking for those rarities.)

I let go of the mini in the years that followed, and recently re-acquired one. I can't deny the pleasure of turning it on and beating the crap out of it. Revenge is a dish best served cold.

In the early 90s, I was a bit of a garage-sale hound. I also inherited a Designer 2000 from a friend - this was a much prettier board. I didn't know at the time that it was Excellence in a different housing, though of course I recognized the brand. I assumed the D2000 was stronger than Excellence, and I found I could hold my own against it. This was a function of my own increasing strength more than anything.

Prowling around garage sales led to the occasional find. I picked up more Fidelitys: the Gambit, the Classic, and the CC7, which shocked me. I'd grab them for five bucks or 10, whatever the asking price. I found the old Mattel handheld, which sometimes had the nerve to play a decent game. Again, we're still in pre-internet days. I knew nothing of the electronic chess community. I was building a library of books. I had vague knowledge of Mephistos, and wondered about this brand.

I quickly realized that the Gambit and the Classic were weaker than Excellence and the CC 7 was the weakest of all. I didn't know the chronology of the machines. I bought them, turned them on and played them, expecting strength and finding frailty.

One garage sale led me to a chess game on floppy disks: Chessmaster 3000. I had an old 386, loaded the game and got my head kicked in. Clearly stronger than Excellence. Subsequent programs in the series drove me to despair. That program, more than any other, gave me a sense of danger. I remember the sense of triumph I felt when I actually managed a draw with CM 3000. I couldn't out-calulate the thing, but I finally realized it was possible to exchange down to dead endgames and avoid the fireworks.

A final thought on playing style: I think the software programs change us more than we change them. I was never (and still am not) a good chess player. Various programs, tests and online encounters tell me I'm in the 1600-1700 range. I reached that level by several methods:

1. Memorizing the basic mates and endgames
2. Looking at simple tactics books (including those I wrote!)
3. Examining lost games (Botvinnik's advice)
4. Examining Fischer's games and goggling at the depth.
4. Reading Jeremy Silman, who explained the concept of targets, good and bad bishops and knights, etc., in a clear manner.
5. Reading everything by CJS Purdy, my favorite chess writer.

I still get impatient, and fall prey to what the great teacher Dan Heisman calls "hope chess." Tabletops punish that approach every time.

For me, "human" style means speculative moves driven by occasional sacrifices rather than dry liquidation. The Kittinger machines by Novag fill that bill. The Novag Obsidian is my favorite opponent these days. It plays an enterprising game, but it includes just enough flaws to make it interesting. I can beat it occasionally via positional means. Same goes for the Mephisto Milano, a pleasurable opponent.

- R.
"You have, let us say, a promising politician, a rising artist that you wish to destroy. Dagger or bomb are archaic and unreliable - but teach him, inoculate him with chess."
– H.G. Wells
paulhuk
Member
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 7:18 pm

Post by paulhuk »

Hi Reinfeld,

I find your posts thought provoking and I'm often nodding in 'sage' agreement. It's also sent me off on an expensive digging expedition looking for chess authors....ermmm....thanks!

Anyway, I was struck by your comments about chess styles and I think you hit the nail on the head regarding a more human type of chess, namely the odd speculative sacrifice and a looser more tactical style play. With my Lyon, I have attempted to guide it in this direction by knocking out the 'pawn structure knowledge' selecting the 'random' function, disabling the 'permanent brain' (I wish my brain was permanent but you can't have everything) increasing its contempt factor and selecting a 'risky' style of play. The great thing about the Lyon is the 2000 half move user book memory. I have been able to program in a simple opening book to replace the 100,000 standard book memory. I mean come on guys, its only fair, right?

The trouble is I still can't quite shake off the feeling that Richard Lang was best friends with Karpov. In spite of the above, the Lyon still manages to squeeze me for space and resort to what you aptly named 'dry liquidation' when materially ahead. All this and still on the easy levels....its a scandal I tell you!!! Either that or I am truly a crap player.

I do find Stockfish more dynamic and speculative on the lower levels and that also applies to my experience of Hiarc on the iphone, elo level set at 1400. I guess the search for the truly human 'flawed, speculative, exciting and challenging' chess program goes on.

Regards,

Paul H
twister
Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 7:06 am

Humans faster sometimes

Post by twister »

Human brain can be faster than the computer because we can avoid the obvious possibilities and skip to the relevant scenario.
southernlights
Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 9:04 pm

Post by southernlights »

I will bump this old thread because it is interesting.

I decided late last year to teach myself chess so I was beyond a rank novice. Yet, I am a developer for a living and the last thing I want to do to relax and play chess is stare at a computer screen. Plus, the new programs are so strong that it's kind of hopeless to play them. It would be like getting into a search competition with Google and thinking you'll be better and faster than their search engine is.

Not wanting to stare at a screen, I said I wanted a real board. Plus, I found when I played on a screen I was making dumb mistakes. The screen makes me feel like I need to rush and you lose the perspective that real pieces give you. Ultimately, I felt that I took my time more and made better moves on a real 3D board.

I bought a used Saitek Centurion as an entry model to play with before I went too far. I have been having fun with that machine and the program is absolutely ruthless about exploiting mistakes. So, it helped me improve a lot just because I was taking my time and not making really dumb blunders as much.

I went online to play some games after practicing with the Centurion. I played against other novices and walked all over them to be honest. The moves they made were ones that the Centurion would have completely killed me with if I had done them. So I knew what not to do to stay out of obvious trouble because the Centurion had beat those ideas out of me already! The Centurion I can say for sure helped me improve a lot.

But, the Centurion plastic pieces felt cheap and the board size was a little too small. I wanted something nicer so I looked at the new Millenium ChessGenius exclusive. It had a wooden board and modern computer. I also longed for a Mephisto board and looked at the Polgars for sale.

I didn't know what to do as both machines were more than strong enough for me. I went back and forth until finally I did the only logical thing: I bought both.

:D

So now I have the modern ChessGenius Exclusive, the Centurion, and the Mephisto Polgar. I don't think I'll turn into a collector, but you never know. The Centurion is just right for working with my kids as they can't do much to destroy it. The other machines are too nice to allow young children to use. As a developer, I also appreciated the excellent programming skill on a machine like the Polgar with a modest processor and RAM. Those designers really did a good job with limited resources that even today these computers can beat 99% of all chess players on the planet.

I have been playing with the ChessGenius and Mephisto Polgar and both are very nice. Although I give the quality nod to the Mephisto Polgar. Even after all these years it is a really great machine. Both machines though play extremely well. I did a couple games with the ChessGenius against my Mac Hiarcs on full strength and the ChessGenius took Hiarcs to a draw on the second game after losing the first.

Overall I have the machines to help me and they have done that. It is more relaxing to me to plug a battery into the Polgar and put it on my table with nothing but me and my notebook to write down the game. No screen. No cords all over the place. Just time to sit and relax.

And really to me that is what the chess computers give that the new generation of computer enabled everything does not. They give you a way to have a chess partner to learn and grow, but not feel like you are on a computer constantly distracting you.
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Hi Southernlights,

Thanks for sharing your insights. Yes there are a few of us still around who enjoy table top chess computers.

Once you get hooked on them it is hard to stay away from them if you enjoy playing chess.

Best regards
Nick
Reinfeld
Member
Posts: 486
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 3:54 am
Location: Tacoma, WA

Post by Reinfeld »

southernlights said this:
Yet, I am a developer for a living and the last thing I want to do to relax and play chess is stare at a computer screen. Plus, the new programs are so strong that it's kind of hopeless to play them. It would be like getting into a search competition with Google and thinking you'll be better and faster than their search engine is.
Dead right. The trouble with the super-strong programs is the way they walk past lower-level errors. You don't get to see why your suggested/guessed move is insufficient. You don't LEARN. Of course, it's possible to make the move and let the engine show you, but that's not the right kind of learning, either.

The high-end chess programs make us lazy. It's too easy to let the engine do the work. That's not the route to improvement. Often, I find that my chosen moves are decent, if not as decisive as the engine's suggestions - but unless I work it out for myself, I don't learn anything.

In that sense, it's more fun to play a mid-level dedicated that won't throttle you. I don't mind being crushed, but I like to understand how the crushing is accomplished.

- R.
"You have, let us say, a promising politician, a rising artist that you wish to destroy. Dagger or bomb are archaic and unreliable - but teach him, inoculate him with chess."
– H.G. Wells
southernlights
Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 9:04 pm

Post by southernlights »

Reinfeld wrote:In that sense, it's more fun to play a mid-level dedicated that won't throttle you. I don't mind being crushed, but I like to understand how the crushing is accomplished.

- R.
Yes. I was playing the Polgar last night really taking my time each move. I'm a novice, but still if I sit and study the board and look at each piece I find I can avoid a lot of mistakes. Plus I was able to see how the Polgar was maneuvering into better position and how it avoided some traps I had tried out. I learned some new defensive strategy as a result.

However when I play these advanced engines I realize pretty quickly how much trouble I am in. I have lowered the level on some of these programs, but it seems like they start doing really dumb things combined with extremely advanced maneuvering at times. It's a weird combination.

I understand that humans do dumb things, too. But I didn't want an engine showing me bad habits which is what some of them were doing when handicapped. I'd rather the engine just select a move that is not quite as good as its best move for instance, or maybe limit how many moves it looks ahead rather than play deliberately bad. This way I can improve, but at the same time learn from what the engine is doing such as proper defense and offense.

Mostly I find though just sitting at the board is more fun than looking at a screen. I have the apps for the iphone and computer, but it seems like you just kind of tap tap tap quickly. Before I know it I'm playing blitz when I wanted to do a 30-60 minute game. Computer screens have a way of rushing you.

Plus, staring at a screen concentrating at a chess board for minutes each move leading into hour+ matches seems daunting. Playing a real chess board without any distractions is just more fun to me and allows me to slow down.

As a result, I find I only use the computers now to analyse my board games. They give some useful insights in that regard. Plus the database access is nice to see how the grandmasters play various positions.

But, the world has moved on it seems. I think what I enjoy about playing chess is the tactile element. I like nice pieces on a well made wood board. I'd like to think there may be a day when there is a bit of a renaissance in chess computers vs. screen chess. The CD didn't kill vinyl so perhaps this fascination with 3000+Elo computers running on quad core processors will not kill off chess machines either.
Post Reply