| |
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: 14 Jan 2007 13:25:41
From: Simon Krahnke
Subject: Re: Thanks for finding weaknesses in the game
|
* Sanny <[email protected] > (2007-01-11) schrieb:
> If you could elaborate these points it may help improve the game.
It would improve the game if you finally decided to fix the timing
issue.
Some people, including me, would try your site again if you did that.
mfg, simon .... l
|
| |
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
|
|
