Can anybody beat a computer at chess??

I played in it last year, but I'm not going this year. Too expensive, plus it really messes with your running for 5 days.

I am currently at 1615 on chess.com, and I bounce between 1600 and 1750. I beat this program now in one try, but it was a good game. I got it in some confusion in the opening. I'd say it's about 1500, but hard to say. doesn't look ahead far, but will calculate a couple moves ahead pretty well.

I haven't played in a rated tournament in over 25 years, but I was rated about 2200 (USCF) in the early '80s. I don't recall playing anyone in a rated tournament who was this weak (although some players turn out to be surprisingly bad when you give them the opportunity to make stupid moves).

Here's a much better chess-playing program. (There are some annoying pop-ups, but I think you can block them.)

http://chess.delorie.com/

Yeah, I played Queen's Gambit also. It didn't do so well after I castled queen's side.

You don't need an 1800 rating to memorize 10 opening moves. I am only USCF 1641 (probably underrated since haven't played tourney since a teenager) and I'm pretty sure I'd score at least 9.0/10 against it (just did one game, won pretty straightforward). I have played some damn good people with 1200-1400 ratings, I'll give it maybe 1200.

Do you know ches?? wrote:

USCF 2083 here. It played the correct opening moves for the KI def. Most u1600s won't get 10 moves without a mistake in a well known opening. It went about 12-15. THEN it started pushing its a pawn for no reason?? But the fact that a player would have to play the first 10 move at best I gave it a 1800 rating. I did only play it once though and maybe it was the/an opening it has been programmed for?

You may be a decent chess player, but you have a horrible habit of placing a question mark where a period would be the correct choice.

What is cool about computer chess is that the best programs (there are dozens of them) have kept getting better.

Back in '96/97, Deep Blue was clearly the best, however it would get hammered by programs you can run on your laptop today. Rybka is the strongest but there is also Fritz9, Junior/ Hiarcs, Toga, Fruit, etc.

The latest programs use some clever pruning to get very deep search depths surpassing what DeepBlue could do on faster hardware.

See talkchess.com for detailed disussions.

I'm 1450 USCF, though I should be 1700+. I had no trouble beating it. It dropped a piece on the 4th move (Danish Gambit Declined). Later its king captured a night which allowed a forking check winning its rook.

So I don't think it is very strong. 1000 seems about right. Probably ok for beginners to practice on.

For $50 or less you can get fritz or rebel or crafty or any number of other programs that will play at 2600 strength (top 10 in the country if it were human).

The question is "Can you beat a woman at chess". A while back Kasparov was asked if there was a women who could beat him and he said "The computer is a lot closer".

either chess is a lot easier than I imagine or I am a lot dumber than I thought. so many posters here beating this program like a drum!!!

I love playing the programs at the highest level, to see how long I can last, to learn better play....

well seeing as both hard drives and processors were vastly smaller and slower than even a laptop today, I could hope that today's computers could run better algorithms

Are there any chess computers or programs that play Fisher Random chess?