Wet blanket!
That is the word according to my dictionary.
I have had an unhappy love to chess in all my life. Loved it but made very small progresses. Didn't give up. Tried and tried with chesscomputers.
Then suddenly. When i bought Chessmaster Diamond I won even in highest level. I thought in my silliness that it was because the squares were bigger in Chess Diamond than in my earlier chess computers. My happiness was complete.
Then somebody found out that the ELO of Chess Diamond is extremely weak. And all my happiness was spoiled. Again.
It is hard to be a human being!
Georg
Wet blanket!
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
Steve B
Re: Wet blanket!
hi GeorgGeorg Langrath wrote:Wet blanket!
That is the word according to my dictionary.
I have had an unhappy love to chess in all my life. Loved it but made very small progresses. Didn't give up. Tried and tried with chesscomputers.
Then suddenly. When i bought Chessmaster Diamond I won even in highest level. I thought in my silliness that it was because the squares were bigger in Chess Diamond than in my earlier chess computers. My happiness was complete.
Then somebody found out that the ELO of Chess Diamond is extremely weak. And all my happiness was spoiled. Again.
It is hard to be a human being!
Georg
do not feel upset that you have defeated a weaker opponent
it makes no difference the strength or even if the opponent knows all of the moves
a win is a win!
Machiavellian Regards
Steve
-
Georg Langrath
Re: Wet blanket!
Your way to see it is a comfort. It would of course be worse if I was beaten of a weak defender! 
Georg
Georg
-
Steve B
Re: Wet blanket!
correct!Georg Langrath wrote:Your way to see it is a comfort. It would of course be worse if I was beaten of a weak defender!
Georg
remember .. even Super GM'S are EXPECTED to defeat inferior opponents
so as far as i can tell you are playing at or near Super GM Strength!
2785 Elo Regards
Steve
-
JonP01
Re: Wet blanket!
Hi Georg,
The website schachcomputer.info lists the Chessmaster Diamond in the high 900s ELO. Although this is based on quick time control games, I would agree with this rating at slower, classical time controls as well.
My extensive testing of my particular unit was frustrating, not so much because the playing strength was far below my expectation, but simply because some relatively minor changes to the hardware and program would have made the world of difference and probably have earned the unit the true 1400 ELO rating it was supposed to have.
Firstly, I found in my testing that all the shallow tactical blunders it made at classical time controls would have been eliminated if the machine had used a processor such as 7.5 Mhz Z80 rather than the 4 Mhz Z80 clone it currently has. The reason for this is that given around 5 minutes thinking time rather than the 3 minute average, it no longer makes any of these sorts of basic blunders. It is no magic pill, but clearly this machine responds extremely well to the processor - not surprising considering the extremely low node count (around 30 nps I seem to recall).
Secondly, the machine almost without fail did whatever it could to enforce a draw via threefold repetition when it was in won positions. It was on account of this bug that the machine was never able to win a single game in all my testing.
Thirdly, the machine can make very odd blunders where it seems to leave critical pawns en prise for no reason - and yet it does not do so if the position is set up from scratch and play commenced from the setup position - this is perhaps some sort of bug related to memory usage or the way it uses the contents of the memory.
So although the machine might have an extremely low rating and be considered extremely weak, it can actually play very nice chess for the most part. It's just unfortunate that the bugs are prevalent enough to effect nearly all games and that the manufacturer did not try to source a better processor. Even the Savant Royale from 9 years previous had a 7.5 Mhz Z80 if I recall correctly!
Regards
Jonathan
The website schachcomputer.info lists the Chessmaster Diamond in the high 900s ELO. Although this is based on quick time control games, I would agree with this rating at slower, classical time controls as well.
My extensive testing of my particular unit was frustrating, not so much because the playing strength was far below my expectation, but simply because some relatively minor changes to the hardware and program would have made the world of difference and probably have earned the unit the true 1400 ELO rating it was supposed to have.
Firstly, I found in my testing that all the shallow tactical blunders it made at classical time controls would have been eliminated if the machine had used a processor such as 7.5 Mhz Z80 rather than the 4 Mhz Z80 clone it currently has. The reason for this is that given around 5 minutes thinking time rather than the 3 minute average, it no longer makes any of these sorts of basic blunders. It is no magic pill, but clearly this machine responds extremely well to the processor - not surprising considering the extremely low node count (around 30 nps I seem to recall).
Secondly, the machine almost without fail did whatever it could to enforce a draw via threefold repetition when it was in won positions. It was on account of this bug that the machine was never able to win a single game in all my testing.
Thirdly, the machine can make very odd blunders where it seems to leave critical pawns en prise for no reason - and yet it does not do so if the position is set up from scratch and play commenced from the setup position - this is perhaps some sort of bug related to memory usage or the way it uses the contents of the memory.
So although the machine might have an extremely low rating and be considered extremely weak, it can actually play very nice chess for the most part. It's just unfortunate that the bugs are prevalent enough to effect nearly all games and that the manufacturer did not try to source a better processor. Even the Savant Royale from 9 years previous had a 7.5 Mhz Z80 if I recall correctly!
Regards
Jonathan