|
Main
Date: 07 Jan 2007 02:19:21
From: Sanny
Subject: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
Now the GetClub Chess has been improved a lot and I feel everyone is satisfied with it's game play. Is there still anything left out that you do not like playing at GetClub Chess. Here are the Basic improvements made at http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html 1. Game speed improved 2. Game thinking & analysis increased 3. Site is made more userfriendly go see the styles. 4. Game follows all rules correctly. Still END GAME needs improvement it thinks a lot in End Game still makes weak moves. Anyone has any suggestion on how to improve the End Game will be appriciated. If you want any changes let me know. I want it to be liked by atleast 90% visitors playing chess at GetClub. 10 % will always have problems because of their slow computers or inefficient OS/ Browsers. they should upgrade their systems. Or do not open many sites atonce and always start new game in new browser (or refreshing it may work.). Bye Sanny Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
|
|
Date: 18 Jan 2007 23:45:38
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
Aande wrote: > Chris F.A. Johnson wrote: > > > You have that backwards; it is only 2/3 moves where it plays in the > > stated time. The vast majority are longer than claimed, and maybe > > half take at least 10 times the stated time. > > Indeed, GetClub Chess even now does seem to be somewhat slow (regularly > took over a minute, even on beginner level) ... > > I think it must have had some AI improvements in the past week or so, > however, judging by the fact that it took some time to collapse against > me (or perhaps it is that I chose a fairly closed opening compared to > the highly tactical tests GetClub Chess was put to by some others). > > WHITE: GetClub Chess > BLACK: Patrick Kalinauskas (Aande) > ECO: B01 (Scandinavian Defense) > > 1 e4 d5 2 exd5 Qxd5 3 Nc3 Qd8 4 d4 Nf6 5 Bc4 e6 > > I decided I would like to see how well GetClub Chess did when offered a > closed opening with few sharp tactical tricks. > > 6 Nf3 Nc6 7 Bf4 Bb4 8 O-O O-O 9 Nb5 Ba5! > > Much better than Ne8, which blocks everything, or Bd6 which gives away > the two Bishops with a cramped game for Black. > > 10 Qd3 > > Personally I would prefer to ginalize Black's Bishop somewhat, and > make my center more secure with 10 c3. The Queen's move aims towards my > King's wing, but is there really anything much White can do against it? > There are no real weaknesses, and Bg5 isn't too effective with the White > Knight that should reinforce the pin being on the other side. > > 10 ... a6 > > in order to drive back the Knight, which was cramping my game a good bit. > > 11 Nc3 Bb6 12 Rad1 Nd5 > > After I played this move I became slightly afraid as I believed that > Bxd5 followed by Ng5 might be dangerous. However, in retrospect ... if > 13 Bxd5 exd5 14 Ng5 g6 and Black will soon play Bf5 and f6 and start to > command all over the board. Hence White tries another tack which should > have been very effective but does not follow it up properly. > > 13 Bg5 f6 > > Much better than Nf6 or Qd7, though this does weaken e6 and the a2-g8 > diagonal somewhat. > > 14 Bd2 Kh8 > > in order to avoid any counter attacks involving the semi-weakness of the > a2-g8 diagonal as long as the Black King remains on it. > > 15 Ne4 Ba7 > > So far, so good (Junior 9 actually gives White as better here!) but now > GetClub Chess falters. The purpose of White's next move is not clear, > but it is clear that most of White's difficulties from here on out > result from having weakened the King-side in this manner. 16 a4 was more > to the point in order to retard b5; or failing that, simply 16 Rfe1 with > pressure on the center and especially e6. > > 16 g3? b5 17 Bxd5? > > Needlessly giving up the pressure on a2-g8 and giving the two Bishops to > Black. Additionally, now Black's white-squared Bishop is unopposed and > while right now this does not seem important yet it will become very > much so in a few moves. 17 Bb3 was simple and good, and preserves a > slightly better game for White, though not as distinct an advantage as > if White had played the better 16 Rfe1 instead of 16 g3. > > 17 ... Qxd5! > > I did not for a moment consider exd5, which would open c8-h3, but seal > the much more valuable (and eventually winning) a8-h1 diagonal. > > 18 Nc3 Qh5 > > Unlike move three, this time it's time for the Queen to adopt an > aggressive position. Junior reports a distinct advantage for Black here > and it is not clear if White really has a good plan. White's next move > is an attempt to pressure e6 in order to discourage Bb7, but it cannot > be prevented for long, after which the diagonal pressure, beginning with > that against f3, quickly becomes intolerable. > > 19 Rde1 Re8 > > 19 ... e5 may be even stronger, but I preferred the simple defensive > move which keeps the center closed and prevents any real oppositional > movement. > > 20 Ne4 > > If 20 d5, then simply Rd8! > > 20 ... Bb7 21 a3 > > This is pretty much capitulation but even I don't really see much for > GetClub Chess to try at this point. If e.g. 21 Nc5 Nxd4! 22 Nxd4 Bxc5 > and White is done. Even Junior can only come up with the equally, > perhaps even more indifferent 21 b3 as best, giving a -1.78 evaluation, > which underscores White's helplessness at this point. > > 21 ... f5? > > This simple driving away would have been worse at move 15, where White > still has the initiative, but now Black operates with direct threats. > > Even so, Junior appears to believe that 21 ... e5 is again stronger > here, and it does appear that GetClub Chess had more resources than it > actually took advantage of in the game. > > 22 Neg5 > > If 22 Nc3, then Nxd4 simply collapses everything. > > 22 ... Nd8 23 Nh4?? > > This loses a piece without a real fight. Instead after 23 Ne5! Black has > a somewhat difficult time of it, and Junior even reports an advantage > for White again. It looks as if Black would have to give up a pawn to > retain attacking chances, after which the situation is somewhat unclear > particularly with the weak white squares on White's King-side and > Black's two Bishops. > > 23 ... h6! 24 Nh3 > > Or 24 Ngf3 g5 and the Knight at f3 loses its support. > > 24 ... g5 25 Bf4(!) > > I have to admire GetClub Chess for this desperate attempt. It hopes that > I will capture the Bishop, after which the situation is much less clear > - after 25 ... gxf4? 26 Nxf4 White's Knights are secure, there is no > direct Black threat and Black's King is somewhat exposed while the QR is > contributing little. Black would have to try to reach the end-game in > order to win, but as yet there is no thought of an end-game. > > Instead capturing the Knight as planned is simple and good and leaves > GetClub Chess completely lost, though it does have a few more tricks. > > 25 ... gxh4! 26 Be5+ Kg8 27 Nf4 > > hoping that I would retreat my Queen and give White some attacking > chances. But I do not waver, instead seeking the end-game with > > 27 ... Qf3! > > forcing the exchange of Queens (else there is mate at g2 or h1) > > 28 Qxf3 Bxf3 29 Re3 Bb7 30 c3 c5 31 Nh5 cxd4!! > > The Exchange is no longer important here. If White accepts it then he > loses his only protector of the White squares which my Knight and QB > will proceed to have a field day on. > > 32 Nf6+ Kf7 33 Rd3 > > As White's game is already quite lost, there is no more need to apply ? > ks to moves. However, either 33 Nxe8 (despite the fact that this > leaves White defenseless even though reducing the material deficit) or > 33 cxd4 would have been a shade better. > > 33 ... dxc3 34 Bxc3 Re7 35 gxh4 > > This allows Black to begin a direct mating attack; however, there is no > reasonable course of action. GetClub Chess could have resigned now but > prefers to wait for the forced mate. > > 35 ... Nc6 > > in order to free the QR, after which the full fury of Black's forces is > soon turned and mate cannot long be delayed. > > 36 h3 e5 37 Nd5 Re6! 38 Bd2 > > If 38 Nc7, Black simply breaks the fork with either Rg8+ or Rg6+. > > 38 ... Rg6+ 39 Kh2 > > at least avoiding the direct eye of the Bishop (39 Kh1 is not really > much worse) > > 39 ... Nd4! 40 h5 > > Finally getting desperate. If 40 Ne3 Nxf3+ wins the Bishop. If 40 Nc3, > 40 Nb4, or 40 Nc7, then mate follows with 40 ... Rg2+ 41 Kh1 Rxf2+ 42 > Kg1 Rg2+ 43 Kh1 Rxd2+ 44 Ne4 (if 44 Kg1 Nf3++ and 45 ... Rh2#) Bxe4+ 45 > Rff3 (Rdf3 leads to a similar mate) Bxf3+ 46 Kg1 (46 Rxf3 Nxf3 and 47 > ... Rh2#) Nc2+ 47 Rd4 Bxd4 48 Kf1 Bg2#. > > 40 ... Rgg8 41 Nc3 Rg2+ 42 Kh1 Rag8 > > This mates, but 42 ... Rxf2+ mates a few moves sooner. > > 43 f3 Nxf3! > > The fork Rd7+ need not be feared, as Rh2# is threatened. If 44 Rdxf3 > Bxf3 45 Rxf3 Rg1+ 46 Kh2 R8g2# is mate. > > 44 Rd7+ Ke6 45 Rd6+ Kxd6 46 Nxb5+ axb5 > > Here GetClub Chess asked me to enter my name and returned me to the main > page. The final moves would be: 47 Bb4+ Ke6 48 Rxf3 Rg1+ 49 Kh2 and > finally 49 ... R8g2 mate. This game was not difficult for you as you played with Beginner Level. Try playing with Easy & Normal Levels they will give good Challenge. And also upon login your game will be recorded to be seen by all. Bye Sanny Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 07 Feb 2007 21:29:31
From: Chris F.A. Johnson
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
How does one claim a draw in your program? After about six times repeating a position, it provides no apparent way to claim the draw. -- Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org > =================================================================== Author: Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
|
| | |
Date: 07 Feb 2007 21:34:55
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
Chris F.A. Johnson wrote: > How does one claim a draw in your program? > > After about six times repeating a position, it provides no apparent > way to claim the draw. > There are no draws in Sanny-Chess. Play on until one of you drops dead from boredom. many improvements have been made. make you happy, long time, Joe. -- Kenneth Sloan [email protected] 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/
|
|
Date: 10 Jan 2007 22:55:37
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Nomorechess is satisfied but has no Ferrari
|
Ralf Callenberg wrote: > > > There was doubtless some progress, but it is still quite weak. I think, > > > when people lose against it, they just try too hard to win. Just relax > > > and play slowly. It will soon start making arbritrary moves without any > > > progress. > > > > Proving my point. What you have just done is describe > > in detail exactly how Sanny's program *used to* play. > > No, it is still doing this. In a current game there is an attack > forming, and he has nothing better to do than ridiculous moves like h6, > f6 on the other side of the board. If you don't give him immediate > threats, he very likely makes nonsense moves. > > > Now > > I find that things are a bit more interesting -- but then, I am > > not merely shifting wood myself. It is possible that the > > real issue here is that you are shifting wood, and expecting > > the chess program to come up with some interesting ideas? > > Well, if you did this with a strong program he would very soon come up > with interesting ideas... But no, that's not quite the way I play. I > just build up my attack very slowly. I bring my pieces in position, > double the rooks, prepare pawn attacks etc. He gives me all the time in > the world, no counter attack, nothing. He completely ignores my > preparations, as they don't include immediate threats. It's simply way > beyond his horizon. Even weak human players would realize what is going > on and would start *some* action. I couldn't win so easily against the > ELO 1400 players in my club. Have a look at the "best of" on his side - > the first 40 players have a record of something like 360 to 12. From what I can see, several of the top players at GetClub consist in multiple identities of: a nearly-an-IM, a 2300+, and a self-professed chess genius. What sort of record do you expect Sanny's program to achieve against such opposition? When I first began playing at GetClub, the program would often display a search depth between 3 and 5 plys, and its play was very weak. But lately, things have improved. Now the program leaps past such lowly numbers in a few seconds, eventually doing around 8 or 9 plys in midgame. Granted, on modern hardware this is no great achievement, but critics act as though Sanny has made no real improvements whatever. IMO, this is no empty ploy, but likely a genuine indication of true search depth. Your comment that you couldn't win so easily against 1400 Elo opposition at your local club may be true, but then, that is human vs. human. A computer is a horse of a different color. Suppose you are playing a 1400 and you are a Queen ahead; in all likelihood, your opponent simply cannot see any tactics you would miss, so it's in the bag. But computers are a bit trickier, as world champion Kramnik recently discovered vs. Deep Fritz, and as former world champ Gary Kasparov also learned. Your method of patiently building up an unstoppable attack of course will work at GetClub, because the program lacks sufficient depth and is not strong enough to do much of anything to you, but then, you are going out of your way to play in anti-computer fashion and this in itself shows that you are afraid of something, that the program may not be quite so weak as you claim. Try going toe-to-toe and see what happens. Your rope-a-dope proves only that the computer is "bigger" and "badder" at tactics, in your mind. Probably an illusion, though. The method you have described is how I try to play (I say, TRY) against commercial programs, which then beat me anyway on tactics. Here is my admission: yes, I am afraid of Fritz and Rybka and Hiarcs and the rest! I admit it. There now: you stop being so afraid of Sanny's program; stop your hiding and come out and play at tactics! : >D -- help bot
|
|
Date: 10 Jan 2007 21:40:31
From: Sanny
Subject: Thanks for finding weaknesses in the game
|
> I bring my pieces in position, > double the rooks, prepare pawn attacks etc. He gives me all the time in > the world, no counter attack, nothing. He completely ignores my > preparations, as they don't include immediate threats. It's simply way > beyond his horizon. Even weak human players would realize what is going Please tell me what should the Computer do when you have doubled your Rook which is not attacking any of computer's pieces. What is a pawn attack, Each pawn will get exchanged for another pawn I think? What do you meant by counter Attack. What type of attack you are looking for? If you could elaborate these points it may help improve the game. Bye Sanny Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
|
Date: 10 Jan 2007 04:17:12
From: Ralf Callenberg
Subject: Re: Nomorechess is satisfied but has no Ferrari
|
help bot wrote: > > No, for me as a user I absolutely don't care about those constraints > > for the programmer. > > It is not the programmer which is constrained; it is the > user computer's resources. Well, as he chose a browser-based program he was constrained in his means he could use. That was what I wanted to say. > Heck, the mere fact that > I can run Windows and multiple browsers while Sanny's > chess program thinks in the background in itself shows > how this cannot be compared to any normal chess > program, which tries to hog as much resources as > possible to improve *playing strength* and for something > called *hashtables* -- two superfluous items which > Sanny's team have simply eliminated. ;>D The behaviour of the program depends on the Browser and the Java Runtime Environment. On my system (WinXP, Pentium 4, Firefox, Sun JRE 1.6.0) for instance it takes all CPU he can get (which is 50%). I doubt, that a desktop version of this applet starting in its own Java Virtual Machine would be so much faster. If the same program would have been implemented in C I would assume a speed gain of roughly a factor of 2 - surely not much more. That Sanny's is running as an applet is no explanation for its poor performance - at least not on systems like mine. > This one is quite weak enough for me; perhaps you > should do your own search? ;>D Well, if I have time I might indeed look for weak programs. It would be interesting which are the weakest programs available (instead of always hunting for the strongest). I expect Sanny's to be a tough contender in this "quest". > > There was doubtless some progress, but it is still quite weak. I think, > > when people lose against it, they just try too hard to win. Just relax > > and play slowly. It will soon start making arbritrary moves without any > > progress. > > Proving my point. What you have just done is describe > in detail exactly how Sanny's program *used to* play. No, it is still doing this. In a current game there is an attack forming, and he has nothing better to do than ridiculous moves like h6, f6 on the other side of the board. If you don't give him immediate threats, he very likely makes nonsense moves. > Now > I find that things are a bit more interesting -- but then, I am > not merely shifting wood myself. It is possible that the > real issue here is that you are shifting wood, and expecting > the chess program to come up with some interesting ideas? Well, if you did this with a strong program he would very soon come up with interesting ideas... But no, that's not quite the way I play. I just build up my attack very slowly. I bring my pieces in position, double the rooks, prepare pawn attacks etc. He gives me all the time in the world, no counter attack, nothing. He completely ignores my preparations, as they don't include immediate threats. It's simply way beyond his horizon. Even weak human players would realize what is going on and would start *some* action. I couldn't win so easily against the ELO 1400 players in my club. Have a look at the "best of" on his side - the first 40 players have a record of something like 360 to 12. Greetings, Ralf
|
|
Date: 10 Jan 2007 00:24:34
From: Sanny
Subject: Return of Zebediah
|
Yesterday Zebediah beat 2 games at GetClub one with easy level and other with Normal Level. Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html After the game was improved it was for first time Zebediah played at GetClub, Lets see if he can beat the Master level the way he used to beat earlier. Zebediah ranks 5th at GetClub chess and have a rating of 1139. He and Chrisf are the only players capable to beat Master Level one after another. Soon we are going to see them in top 3. Bye Sanny Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
|
Date: 09 Jan 2007 23:48:53
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Nomorechess is satisfied but has no Ferrari
|
Ralf Callenberg wrote: > help bot schrieb: > > > Sanny's program uses a Java applet and in order for > > such a test to be fair, the other programs would need > > to run in a similar environment; otherwise you can get > > an apples-to-oranges comparison which reflects upon > > the difference in allocated hardware resources. > > No, for me as a user I absolutely don't care about those constraints > for the programmer. It is not the programmer which is constrained; it is the user computer's resources. Heck, the mere fact that I can run Windows and multiple browsers while Sanny's chess program thinks in the background in itself shows how this cannot be compared to any normal chess program, which tries to hog as much resources as possible to improve *playing strength* and for something called *hashtables* -- two superfluous items which Sanny's team have simply eliminated. ; >D > > BTW, I have played chess programs which were *much* > > weaker than Sanny's, just not on any recent hardware. > > Sure. But the challenge remains: a published program on current > machines playing against Sanny's program. Find a weaker one. This one is quite weak enough for me; perhaps you should do your own search? ; >D > > Many of the critics here are unaware of the real strength > > of the program, > > There was doubtless some progress, but it is still quite weak. I think, > when people lose against it, they just try too hard to win. Just relax > and play slowly. It will soon start making arbritrary moves without any > progress. Proving my point. What you have just done is describe in detail exactly how Sanny's program *used to* play. Now I find that things are a bit more interesting -- but then, I am not merely shifting wood myself. It is possible that the real issue here is that you are shifting wood, and expecting the chess program to come up with some interesting ideas? > You can slightly crash it positionally with a minimum of > effort, as it doesn't show the smallest positional intelligence. This never bothered me; my complaint is and has been that a computer has no excuse for being tactically inferior to humans. Only if and when this problem is overcome will I begin to groan about my vast superiority in the realm of positional play. If and when the program ever betters me in that area, I still have a few more items I could whine about: the lighting, spectators (or a lack of them), cameras, Russian cheaters, the prize money, etc. -- gripe bot
|
| |
Date: 10 Jan 2007 20:42:49
From: Chris F.A. Johnson
Subject: Re: Nomorechess is satisfied but has no Ferrari
|
On 2007-01-10, help bot wrote: > > Ralf Callenberg wrote: >> No, for me as a user I absolutely don't care about those constraints >> for the programmer. > > It is not the programmer which is constrained; it is the > user computer's resources. Heck, the mere fact that > I can run Windows and multiple browsers while Sanny's > chess program thinks in the background in itself shows > how this cannot be compared to any normal chess > program, which tries to hog as much resources as > possible to improve *playing strength* and for something > called *hashtables* -- two superfluous items which > Sanny's team have simply eliminated. ;>D I normally have a lot going on on my computer: I have 20 desktops open, at least 10 in use at any time, typically 10 or more tabs open in Firefox, often IE running under wine, and Opera; at least 3 local shell windows; 3 to 6 shell windows on remote machines; Gentoo file manager; 2 to 4 emacs windows; Pine (mail program); slrn (news reader); xmms (mediaplayer); several background tasks that run every 5 to 15 minutes (e.g., to fetch mail and Usenet messages); other programs as required. I find that Sanny's program slows down my computer much more noticeably than any other chess program (e.g., gnuchess or crafty). -- Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org > =================================================================== Author: Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
|
|
Date: 09 Jan 2007 03:38:09
From: Ralf Callenberg
Subject: Re: Nomorechess is satisfied but has no Ferrari
|
help bot schrieb: > Sanny's program uses a Java applet and in order for > such a test to be fair, the other programs would need > to run in a similar environment; otherwise you can get > an apples-to-oranges comparison which reflects upon > the difference in allocated hardware resources. No, for me as a user I absolutely don't care about those constraints for the programmer. > BTW, I have played chess programs which were *much* > weaker than Sanny's, just not on any recent hardware. Sure. But the challenge remains: a published program on current machines playing against Sanny's program. Find a weaker one. > Many of the critics here are unaware of the real strength > of the program, There was doubtless some progress, but it is still quite weak. I think, when people lose against it, they just try too hard to win. Just relax and play slowly. It will soon start making arbritrary moves without any progress. You can slightly crash it positionally with a minimum of effort, as it doesn't show the smallest positional intelligence. Greetings, Ralf
|
|
Date: 08 Jan 2007 22:56:20
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
>> 1. Game speed improved > > Maybe improved over previous versions, but still pathetic. It is still > up to 10 minutes instead of 10-20 seconds. > http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM5755&game=Chess > > A blatant example for incompetent programming. I saw that game and found computer's Queen got trapped and to save it's Queen it sacrificed it's knight and lost the match. It was interesting game. Your Rating at GetClub Chess is 1070 and you rank 8th among all players. and ahead of other 100 Players. So you are a good player. That game was played with Beginner Level, As you are good player, I feel you should play with Higher Levels. Just like cfaz played with Easy level and won. cfaz rating is 1040 and he ranks 12th at GetClub Chess. It thinks on fixed depth So in complex position it has to think longer as there are lot of variations. It is only 2/3 moves where it takes longer else most of the moves are played faster. Bye Sanny Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 09 Jan 2007 21:40:52
From: Chris F.A. Johnson
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
On 2007-01-09, Sanny wrote: ... > cfaz rating is 1040 and he ranks 12th at GetClub Chess. Do you mean cfaj? > It thinks on fixed depth So in complex position it has to think longer > as there are lot of variations. It is only 2/3 moves where it takes > longer else most of the moves are played faster. You have that backwards; it is only 2/3 moves where it plays in the stated time. The vast majority are longer than claimed, and maybe half take at least 10 times the stated time. -- Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org > =================================================================== Author: Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
|
| | |
Date: 19 Jan 2007 00:12:32
From: Amarande
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
Chris F.A. Johnson wrote: > You have that backwards; it is only 2/3 moves where it plays in the > stated time. The vast majority are longer than claimed, and maybe > half take at least 10 times the stated time. Indeed, GetClub Chess even now does seem to be somewhat slow (regularly took over a minute, even on beginner level) ... I think it must have had some AI improvements in the past week or so, however, judging by the fact that it took some time to collapse against me (or perhaps it is that I chose a fairly closed opening compared to the highly tactical tests GetClub Chess was put to by some others). WHITE: GetClub Chess BLACK: Patrick Kalinauskas (Aande) ECO: B01 (Scandinavian Defense) 1 e4 d5 2 exd5 Qxd5 3 Nc3 Qd8 4 d4 Nf6 5 Bc4 e6 I decided I would like to see how well GetClub Chess did when offered a closed opening with few sharp tactical tricks. 6 Nf3 Nc6 7 Bf4 Bb4 8 O-O O-O 9 Nb5 Ba5! Much better than Ne8, which blocks everything, or Bd6 which gives away the two Bishops with a cramped game for Black. 10 Qd3 Personally I would prefer to ginalize Black's Bishop somewhat, and make my center more secure with 10 c3. The Queen's move aims towards my King's wing, but is there really anything much White can do against it? There are no real weaknesses, and Bg5 isn't too effective with the White Knight that should reinforce the pin being on the other side. 10 ... a6 in order to drive back the Knight, which was cramping my game a good bit. 11 Nc3 Bb6 12 Rad1 Nd5 After I played this move I became slightly afraid as I believed that Bxd5 followed by Ng5 might be dangerous. However, in retrospect ... if 13 Bxd5 exd5 14 Ng5 g6 and Black will soon play Bf5 and f6 and start to command all over the board. Hence White tries another tack which should have been very effective but does not follow it up properly. 13 Bg5 f6 Much better than Nf6 or Qd7, though this does weaken e6 and the a2-g8 diagonal somewhat. 14 Bd2 Kh8 in order to avoid any counter attacks involving the semi-weakness of the a2-g8 diagonal as long as the Black King remains on it. 15 Ne4 Ba7 So far, so good (Junior 9 actually gives White as better here!) but now GetClub Chess falters. The purpose of White's next move is not clear, but it is clear that most of White's difficulties from here on out result from having weakened the King-side in this manner. 16 a4 was more to the point in order to retard b5; or failing that, simply 16 Rfe1 with pressure on the center and especially e6. 16 g3? b5 17 Bxd5? Needlessly giving up the pressure on a2-g8 and giving the two Bishops to Black. Additionally, now Black's white-squared Bishop is unopposed and while right now this does not seem important yet it will become very much so in a few moves. 17 Bb3 was simple and good, and preserves a slightly better game for White, though not as distinct an advantage as if White had played the better 16 Rfe1 instead of 16 g3. 17 ... Qxd5! I did not for a moment consider exd5, which would open c8-h3, but seal the much more valuable (and eventually winning) a8-h1 diagonal. 18 Nc3 Qh5 Unlike move three, this time it's time for the Queen to adopt an aggressive position. Junior reports a distinct advantage for Black here and it is not clear if White really has a good plan. White's next move is an attempt to pressure e6 in order to discourage Bb7, but it cannot be prevented for long, after which the diagonal pressure, beginning with that against f3, quickly becomes intolerable. 19 Rde1 Re8 19 ... e5 may be even stronger, but I preferred the simple defensive move which keeps the center closed and prevents any real oppositional movement. 20 Ne4 If 20 d5, then simply Rd8! 20 ... Bb7 21 a3 This is pretty much capitulation but even I don't really see much for GetClub Chess to try at this point. If e.g. 21 Nc5 Nxd4! 22 Nxd4 Bxc5 and White is done. Even Junior can only come up with the equally, perhaps even more indifferent 21 b3 as best, giving a -1.78 evaluation, which underscores White's helplessness at this point. 21 ... f5? This simple driving away would have been worse at move 15, where White still has the initiative, but now Black operates with direct threats. Even so, Junior appears to believe that 21 ... e5 is again stronger here, and it does appear that GetClub Chess had more resources than it actually took advantage of in the game. 22 Neg5 If 22 Nc3, then Nxd4 simply collapses everything. 22 ... Nd8 23 Nh4?? This loses a piece without a real fight. Instead after 23 Ne5! Black has a somewhat difficult time of it, and Junior even reports an advantage for White again. It looks as if Black would have to give up a pawn to retain attacking chances, after which the situation is somewhat unclear particularly with the weak white squares on White's King-side and Black's two Bishops. 23 ... h6! 24 Nh3 Or 24 Ngf3 g5 and the Knight at f3 loses its support. 24 ... g5 25 Bf4(!) I have to admire GetClub Chess for this desperate attempt. It hopes that I will capture the Bishop, after which the situation is much less clear - after 25 ... gxf4? 26 Nxf4 White's Knights are secure, there is no direct Black threat and Black's King is somewhat exposed while the QR is contributing little. Black would have to try to reach the end-game in order to win, but as yet there is no thought of an end-game. Instead capturing the Knight as planned is simple and good and leaves GetClub Chess completely lost, though it does have a few more tricks. 25 ... gxh4! 26 Be5+ Kg8 27 Nf4 hoping that I would retreat my Queen and give White some attacking chances. But I do not waver, instead seeking the end-game with 27 ... Qf3! forcing the exchange of Queens (else there is mate at g2 or h1) 28 Qxf3 Bxf3 29 Re3 Bb7 30 c3 c5 31 Nh5 cxd4!! The Exchange is no longer important here. If White accepts it then he loses his only protector of the White squares which my Knight and QB will proceed to have a field day on. 32 Nf6+ Kf7 33 Rd3 As White's game is already quite lost, there is no more need to apply ? ks to moves. However, either 33 Nxe8 (despite the fact that this leaves White defenseless even though reducing the material deficit) or 33 cxd4 would have been a shade better. 33 ... dxc3 34 Bxc3 Re7 35 gxh4 This allows Black to begin a direct mating attack; however, there is no reasonable course of action. GetClub Chess could have resigned now but prefers to wait for the forced mate. 35 ... Nc6 in order to free the QR, after which the full fury of Black's forces is soon turned and mate cannot long be delayed. 36 h3 e5 37 Nd5 Re6! 38 Bd2 If 38 Nc7, Black simply breaks the fork with either Rg8+ or Rg6+. 38 ... Rg6+ 39 Kh2 at least avoiding the direct eye of the Bishop (39 Kh1 is not really much worse) 39 ... Nd4! 40 h5 Finally getting desperate. If 40 Ne3 Nxf3+ wins the Bishop. If 40 Nc3, 40 Nb4, or 40 Nc7, then mate follows with 40 ... Rg2+ 41 Kh1 Rxf2+ 42 Kg1 Rg2+ 43 Kh1 Rxd2+ 44 Ne4 (if 44 Kg1 Nf3++ and 45 ... Rh2#) Bxe4+ 45 Rff3 (Rdf3 leads to a similar mate) Bxf3+ 46 Kg1 (46 Rxf3 Nxf3 and 47 ... Rh2#) Nc2+ 47 Rd4 Bxd4 48 Kf1 Bg2#. 40 ... Rgg8 41 Nc3 Rg2+ 42 Kh1 Rag8 This mates, but 42 ... Rxf2+ mates a few moves sooner. 43 f3 Nxf3! The fork Rd7+ need not be feared, as Rh2# is threatened. If 44 Rdxf3 Bxf3 45 Rxf3 Rg1+ 46 Kh2 R8g2# is mate. 44 Rd7+ Ke6 45 Rd6+ Kxd6 46 Nxb5+ axb5 Here GetClub Chess asked me to enter my name and returned me to the main page. The final moves would be: 47 Bb4+ Ke6 48 Rxf3 Rg1+ 49 Kh2 and finally 49 ... R8g2 mate.
|
|
Date: 08 Jan 2007 22:51:09
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Nomorechess is satisfied but has no Ferrari
|
[email protected] wrote: > help bot schrieb: > > Sanny's program is still well short of any > > commercial chess program I know of, so rest at ease. > > That's a bit like saying a broken kick scooter is well short of any > Ferrari. Well it is! > Here's a challenge: there are numerous free chess programs available on > the net. Find one, which is weaker than Sanny's! Sanny's program uses a Java applet and in order for such a test to be fair, the other programs would need to run in a similar environment; otherwise you can get an apples-to-oranges comparison which reflects upon the difference in allocated hardware resources. BTW, I have played chess programs which were *much* weaker than Sanny's, just not on any recent hardware. Many of the critics here are unaware of the real strength of the program, for they either abandon games in progress at a whim, or else play *unrecorded* games -- hinting that they are afraid Sanny may one day cry "wolf", and instead of a lamb, a wolf it will truly be. Here are some facts: a) I am indisputably* a chess genius. b) The program has lost many games to me, *but* -- it has also had me busted countless times. This fact can easily be verified by looking over my games at GetClub.com. c) Other players use fake identities; abandon games in progress; sometimes -- on rare occasions -- actually lose. d) The obvious conclusion is that the program can *sometimes* play reasonably well. -- help bot * A recent scientific study called such claims into serious question, when a sample of my chess games were carefully examined under a microscope and found to contain a multitude of "miniscule blunders". These organisms, once thought to be quite rare, are now recognized to infest even the games of the greatest players; for instance, "the immortal game", "the greatest game ever played", and so forth. Up 'till now, the common practice has been a heavy coat of whitewash, mixed with denial. But some critics say these only mask the symptoms, instead of treating the disease. (Any ideas on how to eradicate these annoying critics?)
|
|
Date: 08 Jan 2007 21:32:42
From: Bjoern
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
Sanny wrote: > Here are the Basic improvements made at > http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html > > 1. Game speed improved Maybe improved over previous versions, but still pathetic. It is still up to 10 minutes instead of 10-20 seconds. http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM5755&game=Chess A blatant example for incompetent programming. > 2. Game thinking & analysis increased Hardly worth commenting on after having played that game. Before you ask which moves I am dissatisfied with, let me simply say that moves 4 to 38 were poor and move 39 was illegal. > 3. Site is made more userfriendly go see the styles. > 4. Game follows all rules correctly. Stop lying, you've been told about this one a great many times: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM5755&game=Chess
|
| |
Date: 09 Jan 2007 06:29:11
From: Dave (from the UK)
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
Bjoern wrote: > A blatant example for incompetent programming. > >> 2. Game thinking & analysis increased > > > Hardly worth commenting on So why bother - you only encourage him to write more spam. >> 3. Site is made more userfriendly go see the styles. >> 4. Game follows all rules correctly. > > > Stop lying, you've been told about this one a great many times: So why bother to tell him something he has been told a great many times before? I can't help but feel if people stopped giving this Sanny feedback about his site, he would finally get bored and perhaps go away and leave the rec.games.chess.* newsgroups alone. -- Dave (from the UK) Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam. It is always of the form: [email protected] Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually. http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
|
|
Date: 08 Jan 2007 12:08:24
From:
Subject: Re: Nomorechess is satisfied but not all.
|
help bot schrieb: > Sanny's program is still well short of any > commercial chess program I know of, so rest at ease. That's a bit like saying a broken kick scooter is well short of any Ferrari. Here's a challenge: there are numerous free chess programs available on the net. Find one, which is weaker than Sanny's! Greetings, Ralf
|
|
Date: 08 Jan 2007 02:36:25
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Nomorechess is satisfied but not all.
|
Sanny wrote: > > Here are the Basic improvements made at > > http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html > > > > 1. Game speed improved > > 2. Game thinking & analysis increased > > 3. Site is made more userfriendly go see the styles. > > 4. Game follows all rules correctly. > > > > Nomorechess has finished 131 Games at GetClub without much problems. > And he is the best player with highest rating. Can anyone beat him. I think one of the reasons we keep seeing postings in which a complainer whines about some problem yet it cannot be verified, is the fear that the program may in fact have been improved such as to approach the strength of many commercial chess programs. Thus, a poster might play an unrecorded game knowing that if he wins, and wins quickly, he can come here and brag/complain, without the risk of having a loss, draw, or titanic struggle recorded at GetClub where others can see it. The truth is, many of the posters on this forum are very strong players, and ought not to worry so much about protecting their delicate egos from a bruising by computers. Sanny's program is still well short of any commercial chess program I know of, so rest at ease. Not too long ago, the program had a flaw in the sense that a dishonest (IMO) player could simply disconnect when losing, and the game would disappear, whereupon he could then try anew. This was corrected, however, and now things are a bit tougher, and we have seen that there are few who have been able to make a big plus score, especially when you consider that some of the posters here have multiple identities at GetClub. I wouldn't exactly say that nomorechess is "satisfied", however. The game's speed of play is still such that it can be difficult to complete even a single game in one day -- except on the weakest levels. Nevertheless, even these weaker levels do provide a bit of entertainment, if not a real challenge. Unlike the harsher critics of Sanny's confounded contraption, I enjoy the fact that I am not doomed from the start, having faced-off against a machine which can calculate millions of variations in a few seconds. I enjoy being able to out-calculate the machine at tactics, yet having to be careful not to blunder severely, else suffer the consequences. For me, this very nearly mimics the situation where I would be playing an average, human opponent! The key difference is in the openings, where an average tournament player might well be booked up quite deeply, while Sanny's program is nearly certain to do something odd early on. And again, I find this to be a challenge, for when the program does something I am not familiar with, I must work out what is wrong and how best to exploit it. I am not able to rely upon any by-rote memory of book moves, but am put on my own quite early -- and this I see as a good thing. Okay, and winning most of my games "brilliantly" may also be a factor worth considering. -- help bot
|
|
Date: 08 Jan 2007 02:25:49
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
> > 2. Game thinking & analysis increased > > Game play still too stupid Could you show me recorded games where you are winning due to it's stupid moves. If we get a recorded game played by you and you point out Move 35 was wrong due to xxxxxx reasions We may remove the errors and in future you will get better games. Play recorded game at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html and show it's mistake. Beginner Level is not good opponent for strong players. So try playing with Easy & Normal. They will take a little longer but give you great challenges to win and also we can see any mistake or time trouble you get while playing recorded games and remove them. Bye Sanny Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 08 Jan 2007 20:37:34
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
Sanny wrote: >>> 2. Game thinking & analysis increased >> Game play still too stupid > > Could you show me recorded games where you are winning due to it's > stupid moves. No. When your program plays in the time advertised, PERHAPS I'll register and play recorded games. For now, recording games has no value to me. > If we get a recorded game played by you and you point out > Move 35 was wrong due to xxxxxx reasions We may remove the errors and > in future you will get better games. This is, without a doubt, the *silliest* way to try to improve a chess program. No wonder the current program plays so badly. > > Play recorded game at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html and show it's > mistake. Why should I do that? > > Beginner Level is not good opponent for strong players. So try playing > with Easy & Normal. I will play Easy & Normal when the program plays at the Beginner level at the advertised speed. You would have to pay my daily rate to get me to play the current Easy & Normal levels - and I don't think you can afford me. > They will take a little longer but give you great > challenges to win and also we can see any mistake or time trouble you > get while playing recorded games and remove them. No, I don't think you are capable of doing that. There is no evidence to support such a conclusion. Prove that you are competent - implement proper time controls and enforce them. Compared with playing Expert level chess, this task is really quite easy. The fact that you have not done this, despite numerous complaints, is ample evidence that you are simply incompetent. > > Bye > Sanny > > Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html > -- Kenneth Sloan [email protected] 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/
|
|
Date: 08 Jan 2007 01:53:50
From: Sanny
Subject: Nomorechess is satisfied but not all.
|
> Here are the Basic improvements made at > http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html > > 1. Game speed improved > 2. Game thinking & analysis increased > 3. Site is made more userfriendly go see the styles. > 4. Game follows all rules correctly. > Nomorechess has finished 131 Games at GetClub without much problems. And he is the best player with highest rating. Can anyone beat him. He has played with Beginner, Easy & Normal Levels and is able to finish most of the games. So I feel other players who complain, should play recorded game. So that if they find any move wrong they can show the recorded game where mistake was made. It is very difficult to understand weaknesses without seeing the recorded games. So always play recorded games So that you get ratings and we know actual strength of the game. I and my friends get beaten by it's beginner level easily. So I feel others too will find beginner & Easy levels difficult. I am happy to find GetClub.com Chess playing much better than earlier. Bye Sanny Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
|
Date: 07 Jan 2007 16:47:26
From:
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
I strongly disagree with the previous posters. The technical problems with Sanny's site are trifles. By far the most annoying thing is Sanny's relentlessly enthusiastic and hyperbolic promotion of a third-rate website. He is almost as annoying as psychopath Sam Sloan. Sanny, try to understand this: if your site was any good it would grow rapidly by word-of-mouth. You have a very long way to go before that happens.
|
|
Date: 07 Jan 2007 18:27:07
From: Ron
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
In article <[email protected] >, "Sanny" <[email protected] > wrote: > Here are the Basic improvements made at > http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html > > 1. Game speed improved > 2. Game thinking & analysis increased > 3. Site is made more userfriendly go see the styles. > 4. Game follows all rules correctly. As Kenneth pointed out, all of the above are still areas of catastrophic weakness. The game is too slow, too weak, the site is ugly and amateurish, and the game still struggles with some basic rules (specifically concerning promotion and check). -Ron
|
|
Date: 07 Jan 2007 11:23:54
From: Kenneth Sloan
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
Sanny wrote: > Now the GetClub Chess has been improved a lot and I feel everyone is > satisfied with it's game play. You are incorrect. > > Is there still anything left out that you do not like playing at > GetClub Chess. > > Here are the Basic improvements made at > http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html > > 1. Game speed improved Game speed still too slow > 2. Game thinking & analysis increased Game play still too stupid > 3. Site is made more userfriendly go see the styles. Site still ugly, garish, and annoying. > 4. Game follows all rules correctly. Game does not observe self-imposed and advertised time limits. My most recent game ended when the program apparently fell into an infinite loop (it ran for 23 hours - on one move, in a completely lost position - before I terminated it) > > > Still END GAME needs improvement it thinks a lot in End Game still > makes weak moves. Anyone has any suggestion on how to improve the End > Game will be appriciated. There is no point in improving the END GAME unless and until you can handle simple things - like moving the pieces correctly, > > If you want any changes let me know. I want it to be liked by atleast > 90% visitors playing chess at GetClub. Enforce time limits (on both humans AND the program) > > 10 % will always have problems because of their slow computers or > inefficient OS/ Browsers. they should upgrade their systems. Or do not > open many sites atonce and always start new game in new browser (or > refreshing it may work.). Liar. > > Bye > Sanny > > Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html > -- Kenneth Sloan [email protected] 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/
|
|
Date: 07 Jan 2007 03:42:20
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
Sanny wrote: > Now the GetClub Chess has been improved a lot and I feel everyone is > satisfied with it's game play. > > Is there still anything left out that you do not like playing at > GetClub Chess. > > Here are the Basic improvements made at > http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html > > 1. Game speed improved > 2. Game thinking & analysis increased > 3. Site is made more userfriendly go see the styles. > 4. Game follows all rules correctly. > > > Still END GAME needs improvement it thinks a lot in End Game still > makes weak moves. Anyone has any suggestion on how to improve the End > Game will be appriciated. > > If you want any changes let me know. I want it to be liked by atleast > 90% visitors playing chess at GetClub. > > 10 % will always have problems because of their slow computers or > inefficient OS/ Browsers. they should upgrade their systems. Or do not > open many sites atonce and always start new game in new browser (or > refreshing it may work.). Generally speaking, the single biggest issue is simply playing speed, which has the stronger players unwilling to move up to the more advanced levels, where they might start to be tested a bit. In my opinion, the program has improved considerably over time, and is now playing an interesting game, apart from what you said about the endgame still being weak. (Naturally, nothing you and your IM4 team can do will ever cause the program to give geniuses like myself any worries, though. ; >D) -- help bot
|
|
Date: 07 Jan 2007 02:22:40
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Are all satisfied with GetClub Chess.
|
One more thing how many would like to play it offline by downloading the game if response is good we will create a offline version also. But ratings will not be given for those games. So you can play without internet connection also. Bye Sanny Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
|