no
Are Bot's ratings accurate?
Sort:
I am rated about 500 and defeated the 1500 bot on my first try after having defeated the 1300 bot on my second try. I do not think the ratings are at all accurate.
I am rated 200 and beat a 1500 so it is improbable
hi all - to put into perspective, I am pretty much a beginner, ranked in the 200's I think, and I regularly beat all of the bots. I just played and beat the 3200 maximum engine, so doesn't make sense, frankly
Nov 28, 2022
0
#147
There was definitely something wrong with that engine when you played it.
yeah, it sometimes murders me, and it sometimes breaks - I'm playing the 1600 now, and I can't get past her
Nov 28, 2022
0
#149
Bots are overrated. I’m 813 and can usually beat 1200 bots. They’re funny though, if you get down they ramp it up, if you get ahead, they give up and make meaningless moves and blunders. Maybe it’s to keep the games short one way or the other.
Nov 29, 2022
0
#150
Vibhansh_Alok wrote:
My chess.com rating keeps circulating around 1400(blitz).... on the other site it is around 1700. Whatever that's not the matter, Among the newly arrived chess bots... I tried a 1600 rated guy and got the victory, first I thought I was lucky, so I tried many times and won. If Robots are accurately rated, that means I should be a 1600+ rated player. If not then what are the excuse for keeping fake rated bots
Here's one of the game...
I am 1100 Rapid and also beat this bot. I think that the bots play at a lower level than the actual players do, since I was able to beat Aron when I was rated 500.
FilipHgk wrote:
I beat Li, a 2000 rated bot, and I'm rated around 1250 in Rapid
Did you set a time limit? I played antonio in 10 minute games and surprisingly lost a fair amount of games.
Mar 5, 2023
0
#153
dfgh123 wrote:
FilipHgk wrote:
I beat Li, a 2000 rated bot, and I'm rated around 1250 in Rapid
Did you set a time limit? I played antonio in 10 minute games and surprisingly lost a fair amount of games.
No, but I played fairly fast. I did not use more than 10 minutes, I'm pretty sure. I did not beat her the first time though. I drawed her 2 times before beating her also
Yes. Chess.com engines are too much overrated. They make big blunders even at higher ratings level like 1500-1600. I set elo rating level=1350 of stockfish in Arena and set time per move=1 second and played it against chess.com engine level=1500 (not any bot, plain engine). Stockfish (1350) was White and chess.com engine (1500) was black. Stockfish (1350) Won. Here's the match.
Mar 31, 2023
0
#155
yes they are inflated, i tore apart one of the 1700 bots without much try
Here's the another match.
Chess com computer 2000 rating (white) vs Rybka with strength 1200 and depth=1 half move in Arena (black) (Game ended in draw, however 2000 rating should win. So chess com engine are too much overrated. )
Hack89 wrote:
Isn't it sort of fruitless to compare blitz ratings against bots when there's no time limit? Maybe it doesn't make much of a difference when you're no longer a beginner, but I have a very low rating of 600 in blitz and seem to play on equal footing with bots rated 1300 (played it a few times but it's the highest rating I've tried so far). Seems to me like playing with or without time constraints are two very different things that can't really be compared.
yeah ive defeated a 1200 bot and im 400 (not joking) but i don't think its all on how the bad the bot is like when i play against bots i go full focus mode like i sometimes used a REAL chess board to play against them so i can focus more which actually works even if a 1200 bot is not actually 1200 he will at the very least be 850
Ayee matee make sure that you can adopt your corresponding bot after some tries, beating twice means nothing, I beat 2900 bot twice with both colors but I'm only 1900
Adopting: being able to beat opponent 10 times consecutively
May 16, 2023
0
#159
The bots are actually rated by the analysis engine sometimes with clearly lower ratings (but also higher), so one needs to play a lot of games against a bot for comparison. So it would be nice if it were possible to generate an overall more precise personal rating only from the computer games to compare it with the human players' ratings.
jofchess wrote:
The bots are actually rated by the analysis engine sometimes with clearly lower ratings (but also higher)
The script that predicts the players rating based on one game is an experimental tool at best (and that is being very generous).
On the other hand, the "rating" of bots is not a rating at all. It is just a number that some programmer wrote there, based on gut feeling.
Are bots' ratings accurate?
No, end of story.