Can I play assisted by a computer?

[jsuhardjo]

Greg,

I want to enjoy playing correspondence chess with the help of my
program. Before I start, I want to check with you if it is okay.
Most correspondence club doesn't allow using computers.

Thanks!

Johanes

[cliff]

Greg,

I want to enjoy playing correspondence chess with the help of my
program. Before I start, I want to check with you if it is okay.
Most correspondence club doesn't allow using computers.

Thanks!

Johanes

Speaking for myself, I appreciate the honesty. I suspect that there are already more than a few players on this site (as with any site) that have the computers play for them, and take the credit themselves. I think I played one recently. I spoke to another player in the same event, and he is of the same opinion. I believe that is cheating!

You, on the other hand, are being completely honest and up-front about it.
While I wouldn't play you myself (If I want to play a computer, I can do that anytime), I don't doubt that many others would have no objections, as long as you were as honest about that at the start of the tournament or match.

I'm not certain as to what the exact rules are. For that, I imagine you'll have to wait for a response from Greg.

However, I do have one question, Johanes. Exactly why would you want to use the computer to play your games? You rob yourself of a lot of the challange and thrill of the game that way, it would seem to me. And there is no learning when you do that either. And learning from one's mistakes, and then feeling the happiness when you do, is lost also.

Anyway, best of luck!

- Cliff

[dcroll]

I await Greg's answer too, because I missed any clarification on that in the FAQ. I only play by myself, but I run completed games through the chess software for analysis. And I also try to find out why the chess software suggested other moves - I'm still more or less a novice player.

In my opinion, I find computer help OK if you tell your opponents that you are using a chess software. And with computer aid, you should only play unrated games.

[jsuhardjo]

I want to play with my program because:
1. I'm too old and busy to analyze all the tactics for 10-15 moves.
2. After building up an excellent position then losing due to a silly blunder, chess
is not enjoyable anymore. If I lose, I'd rather do it after misjudging a position or
missing a deep combination, not due to silly blunders.
3. I want to know what our combination can achieve. I'm sure it will help me
understand the game better.
4. Along the way, I may improve my mediocre program.

I learn that in FICGS, "Computer assistance is authorized". I will play there,
hopefully with other people playing with computer assistance, or people who think
computers are inferior in long term strategy. In fact, baring blunders, I think I can
beat my program 90% of the time in correspondence games (an indication of how
stupid my program is), so I'm looking for a correspondence chess club to play
strong humans+computers.

I don't want to cheat because winning is secondary to me after enjoyment of the
game (minus silly blunders).

Thanks!

[dcroll]

Hi dear chess friend,

although it is ungodly early for me (7:55 AM), I want to post some comments on your reply... Please don't be afraid if some of my replies sound a bit rude - but your arguments astonished me.

I want to play with my program because:

1. I'm too old and busy to analyze all the tactics for 10-15 moves.

With 27, I am also too old to play like a child: Playfully-silly blundering on the 64 squares, trying out new errors, hoping to commit the Immortal Blunder which puts you right in the first chapter of Kasparovs My Great Descendants.

Chess is about errors, and every art allows errors. If a computer drew the Mona Lisa (to cite a hopelessly overrated painting), less than half of the people would visit Paris' Louvre museum. Although art is a lot about perfection, I would be afraid of any art where everything is perfect.

I like to draw landscapes, owls (favourite animals, by the way), nude acts. Afterward, I always find errors and see things that went wrong.

It's part of your profession.

2. After building up an excellent position then losing due to a silly blunder, chess
is not enjoyable anymore. If I lose, I'd rather do it after misjudging a position or
missing a deep combination, not due to silly blunders.

You know how many games I lose after not even caring about position or deep combinations?

You know that I still like chess?

I strongly suggest playing fewer games, so you have enough spare time to actually commit the good and the bad moves entirely by yourself.

3. I want to know what our combination can achieve. I'm sure it will help me
understand the game better.

I understand the game better by comments from my fellow players.

That's what I never got when I spent a year at the local chess club. Eight people met there every second week, and everybody except me (of course) was well over 40, most smoked the pipe, and some mumbled hardly intelligible comments when I did a Really Exceptional Blunder (which occured every fifth move or so, despite the name).

This is the kind of experience that wants you use chess software. Don't be afraid of losing, and making errors.

What I did was downloading ExaChess (for other operating systems, there are alternatives, of course) and running every completed games through its engine. Then it tells me which moves I could have played better.

White: V. Anand
Black: B. Kasparov
Event: Sub-Antarctic GM Tournament
Date: 2002
(A00 Gedult's O)

1 f3 e5
2 g4
2 Nc3 -0.62 v -327.68 2 ... Nc6 3 e3 Bb4 4 Nge2 Nf6 5 a3 Be7 6 Ng3
2 ... Qh4# 0-1

And then I try to think about why I the program suggested this 2.Nc3. I make notes of my thoughts, and store it in the game file.

Do your homework first, as every schoolteacher likes to say. Then you can start complaining.

4. Along the way, I may improve my mediocre program.

That's a fantastic hobby of yours! I once programmed my own chess "engine". What it did was suggesting the "best" move by searching through a database of already played games, basically an opening book...

I learn that in FICGS, "Computer assistance is authorized".

I first thought you wrote FICS, and there you would need a special computer account in order to let your software play.

Sure, correspondence chess is about playing good or rather "perfect" games. For that goal, they allow computer assistance. They see themselves as a kind of scientists. When the postal service was much slower than it is today, you had weeks or even a months of available time to analyze your move and anticipate your opponent's one.

My feeling says correspondence chess never was about fun. But that's what I want to find here.

I will play there,
hopefully with other people playing with computer assistance, or people who think
computers are inferior in long term strategy.

I don't hope you will use computer aid here on slowchess.com.

Except when you tell your opponent that you're using assistance and when you're playing unrated games. But that's my opinion - Greg has to decide on that.

In fact, baring blunders, I think I can
beat my program 90% of the time in correspondence games (an indication of how
stupid my program is), so I'm looking for a correspondence chess club to play
strong humans+computers.

Hmm... but not here. Please.

I don't want to cheat because winning is secondary to me after enjoyment of the
game (minus silly blunders).

Above, you said that making blunders takes the fun out of playing chess. But it's too early in the morning to find out if you have really contradicted yourself...


Regards, David[/i]

[jsuhardjo]

> Hmm... but not here. Please.

Thank you, that's what I want to know.

I will keep my membership here for a while, but it's likely that I won't have time to
play the real human chess, in which case I'll cancel my membership.

Thanks again.

Johanes

[dcroll]

Well, but I encourage you to become a member of FICS and improve your chess engine in a way that it can actually interact with FICS.

Then, your software can play against other human and computer players. It will start and play the games fully on its own. Programming a chess engine and letting it compete with others is something I admire.

But I don't see any sense in chess when anybody replaces his own experience, intelligence and creativity.


Regards, David

[gmiller]

Short answer: No. Computer assistance is not allowed here.

I thought that was mentioned in the FAQ, or the sign up page.

[cliff]

I want to play with my program because:
1. I'm too old and busy to analyze all the tactics for 10-15 moves.
2. After building up an excellent position then losing due to a silly blunder, chess
is not enjoyable anymore. If I lose, I'd rather do it after misjudging a position or
missing a deep combination, not due to silly blunders.
3. I want to know what our combination can achieve. I'm sure it will help me
understand the game better.

I know you're likely tired of having your motivations disected, my friend, so forgive me. I have to echo dcroll's comments though.

a) Too old and too busy? Perhaps the problem is you're playing too many games at once. I try to limit myself to about 15 - 20 games at a time. I think the most I eer had was 28 (3 on other sites I was weaning myself from) around the time of the 2009 Open first round. Or perhaps you're working to hard to get the program perfected, in which case you're missing a lot of the fun of the game yourself, and the program is the main thing occupying yourself. And if it's job-related fatigue, and the simple solution is to cut back a few games. I'm 55 by the way, and self-employed, so age is a wee bit relative...

3. I want to know what our combination can achieve. I'm sure it will help me understand the game betterI don't want to cheat because winning is secondary to me after enjoyment of the game (minus silly blunders).
Thanks!

b) If the program suggests or finds the combination and/or what it can achieve for you, you're not really seeing it for yourself. That can only come with practice, and believe me, in chess, learning from blunders, silly or not, is the only way to become proficient at the game! And you'd be surprised how quickly you can learn not to repeat those blunders. But first you 'gotta make 'em!' Then you realize why the moves were blunders. And, bless their little silicon hearts, there's no way computer can learn for you!

Please consider enjoying the games for yourself first, and worry about improving the program second - and best of luck with that, by the way! It's a project that's certainly worth pursuing!

- Cliff

[jsuhardjo]

Thank you everybody for the answers/comments/suggestions!

For right now, I choose to play a different game. You guys are running, I'm riding
a donkey, a stupid donkey. You strive to run faster, I enjoy the weird conversation
with my donkey.

Maybe I will change my mind and decide to play the normal chess. In that case,
I know Net-Chess is a nice place to be.

In case you're curious, my program is parrot on FICS. Has been there for many
years, never get any better because I don't have time to really work on it.

Ciao!

Johanes

[islanderfan]

would like to try and play against your comp. if you wish

[jsuhardjo]

Sure, parrot is always open to play anybody unrated. Rated if it can gain 1 point
by winning (just to avoid ridiculous drops in rating). I do "noplay" those obnoxious
people who disconnect when they're losing and never resume the game.

Johanes

[cliff]

I'd also be interested in tryng a game against "Parrot" myself. Perhaps a few different opponents here can help in it's development!

[islanderfan]

offer up nonrated though!

[sammyo]

The answer is very simple, if you want to use a computer then play against it yourself. Don't bother us po folks what can't afford a computer..

I did try using the Chess Lessons book once and was accused of cheating so I gave it to my grandson.

[jboger]

I've been wondering about this myself, as I haven't seen any rule against it anywhere on the site. Nonetheless, I should state that I have refrained from using a computer (just look at some of my games, or the fact I'm currently at my rating floor!)

I think there should be an option to have unrated tournaments, and one could then state in the comments that computers are allowed for that unrated tournament only.

To me, the challenge would be to see if and where I could find improvements in the computer's line of analysis. I imagine this would happen mostly in complicated (more than six pieces+pawns for both sides combined) endgames - computers tend to be pretty rotten at endgames for which they don't have tablebases, because they can't form long-term plans (i.e. the computer looks move by move, whereas the human sees "these pawns are blocked, those pawns are blocked, so I need to get my king over to stop *that* pawn.)

It would also allow me to fool around with openings I don't normally play, and see how sound they are when both sides are extremely talented.

tl;dr: I don't want to play "my computer vs. his computer". I want to play "my computer + my insights vs. his computer + his insights", called "Advanced Chess" by Kasparov. But until unrated tournaments are an option, I will refrain from using a computer.