Chess Bots

I think the chess bot ratings should be readjusted. I can beat bots 1k-1300 with ease. But when I play online in my blitz rating bracket which is half that of the bots, it's way way harder. Players are much better in their online ratings than the bots ratings are. I think it should be looked at and changed. These bots make stupid mistakes that lose them the games constantly and players don't really do that even in the low elo I'm in.

It's really hard to make an engine play like specific ratings, especially at lower rating levels. There's lots of factors that determine why a player is a given rating and mimicking that with bots isn't easy.

Yeah, honestly, I have zero clue on how the bot ratings are made and I'm sure it's a lot more complicated than any average person thinks as you mention. But I feel like bot ratings are inflated big time.

It's true that bots at a certain level are not as strong as a human at that level, but that's not the issue. There are two things, inconsistency of the bot and lack of "sufficient" granular levels. By sufficient, I am talking about ~100 rating difference. Instead of jumping 1000 to 1350 to 1700 there should be bots in between at ~1200 and ~1500.

On a normal day, I can beat 1500s. I have some difficulty with 1600s but can usually win. 1700s may screw up, but I usually miss my chances. So the question then is, are the wins and even the advantage at 1700 caused by best play by the bot at that level or is it playing a weak side of 1700 (like 1600) and then 1700-1800 for the crushing games?

Perhaps we shouldn't label bots 1300 or 1700. They should be rated within a range (1250 to 1450) for the april-gen-z bot for example.

I defeated Nelson bot (1300) and when reviewed the game...the bot's game rating was 150 and mine was 1450...LOL chess.com bots are terrible