Computers have been programmed to play excellent chess at a level far beyond the strongest human.
However, most humans don't enjoy being beaten in every game, so they had to throw in a few lines of code to make the bots randomly drop pieces and make dumb moves so that humans would have a chance.
That's what makes their play unreal. They play at a grandmaster level for a few moves and then boom, leave your queen hanging.
I like bots because playing them teaches me to pay better attention to the board.
I like bots because playing them teaches me to pay better attention to the board.
This is one reason why I like playing the bots -- I think it is instructive. Plus some of the bots make the same opening moves over and over, so I can try using different defenses to see what happens.
I'm curious though about the differences between human and bot chess play. What makes playing bots such a different experience? Am I really wasting my time by continuing to play against bots as I strive to improve, or can bots be a useful tool in the chess learning toolbox?
It's just the popular meme to say bots are worthless right now.
The big difference between a bot and a human is that humans make mistakes that are reasonable to other humans. Bots make mistakes that are garbage. A human will do things like hang a piece, miss a backwards knight move or a long diagonal, or leave their backwards pawn undefended. A bot will do things like move their king for no reason at all.
Humans tend towards chess strategy, where they move a bishop here because it looks good, or move a knight there because I want a knight there in the future. Bots calculate instead, so they will just make a move that doesn't make sense now, but open a huge tactic 4 moves down the road. They're evil that way.
That said, you are using bots the right way, and you should continue to do exactly what you are doing. There's nothing wrong with playing bots as long as you are not playing them exclusively. They have their strengths and it is silly to throw away a good tool if it is helping you improve.
You aren’t wasting your time with playing the engine but you definitely should be playing people a majority if not all of your time at the beginner level.
Humans will make multiple mistakes and blunders plus, you would be surprised how many people cannot follow thru on a win/give the game back.
I enjoy engine prep for running my lines and pattern recognition in the middle games but I leave it at that.
I play against computer engines from time to time.
Usually though I just play a couple of moves and then get up, say nothing and leave the room.
Bots are fine but just remember when you make the change to playing humans the ratings are way different. I would say you need to play Bots approximately double your rapid rating.
Box are great for teaching you to defend tactics. They are way better at tactics than Live players are.
I just played a game against bot.Pablo (1600) from chess.com in time 5 minutes (against humans I never play otherwise so it is important to play in the same conditions otherwise the experience is meaningless) :
1) d4-d5
2) c4-dxc4
Against a human this variant doesn't bother me too much but against a bot it bothers me more so the same positions I play don't have the same meaning or "position evaluation" whether against a human or a bot.
Against bot I have a kind of warning signal that I'm losing a pawn and even though I know it's not really lost, I still wondered if I'd play 3.Qa4+ . I thought maybe Pablo would play 3. Nf3-Be6 and I was wondering how exactly I get it back.
The material element tends to take more value than the position element against bot while against human it is the opposite.
And even if I'm still going to play 3. Nf3 I have already started to calculate or thinking things whereas against a human I would have played directly 3. Nf3 and I would have lost no time.
3) Nf3-c5
When I play 3.Nf3 it is to avoid 3...e5 which can lead to a game without Queens and as a human I don't like that because it makes me think that the game will be a draw and I can have more difficulty to win positions which are not endgames but without Queens.
Pablo plays the same idea as 3...e5 but "the other way around" since the Knight f3 does not control the c5 square.
4) d5-Nf6
5) Nc3-e6
Pablo doesn't leave me alone and for example if 6.dxe6-Qxd1+ 7.Kxd1-Bxe6 against a bot I give up while against a human I'll continue and see what happens.
6) e4-exd5
7) exd5-b5
8) Nxb5-Qxd5 ??
I was surprised by this big mistake and a human would have rather made a big mistake like 8...Nxd5 ?? 9.Qxd5-Qxd5 10.Nc7+
What I'm trying to say is that against bot it gives more the impression that bot is voluntarily making a big mistake while the human is involuntarily making a big mistake because he has miscalculated etc. but it is not as direct and grotesque.
Then when I have a completely winning position against a human I will win normaly but against a bot it's not so easy, bot can find resources to make the game last and maybe I can lose on time or make a stalemate.
I don't think there's much wrong with them - but I think the stronger bots you play, the better, as their deliberate errors get less numerous and obvious. Ive been working my way through the bots and am currently trying to beat all the 2200 bots - they each take several attempts but that's to be expected, I'm 1400. Noam is genuinely better than me, it will take real effort and concentration (and multiple attempts) to beat him. But when you can find that level where the bots are better than you but you still have a small chance of winning if you play your best chess, I think that's the sweet spot. Sometimes I play the harder bots even the 3200 engine but it's just fun to throw an effort against that beast, I don't know if I'll ever beat it.
I don't think there's much wrong with them - but I think the stronger bots you play, the better, as their deliberate errors get less numerous and obvious. Ive been working my way through the bots and am currently trying to beat all the 2200 bots - they each take several attempts but that's to be expected, I'm 1400. Noam is genuinely better than me, it will take real effort and concentration (and multiple attempts) to beat him. But when you can find that level where the bots are better than you but you still have a small chance of winning if you play your best chess, I think that's the sweet spot. Sometimes I play the harder bots even the 3200 engine but it's just fun to throw an effort against that beast, I don't know if I'll ever beat it.
I agree! I love challenging the higher bots (for me, those are the ones in the intermediate range). Occasionally I win, and that's exciting. Mostly I lose, but I try to watch what they're doing, ask myself questions and then -- in future games -- try different things based on what I've learned.
I don't think there's much wrong with them - but I think the stronger bots you play, the better, as their deliberate errors get less numerous and obvious. Ive been working my way through the bots and am currently trying to beat all the 2200 bots - they each take several attempts but that's to be expected, I'm 1400. Noam is genuinely better than me, it will take real effort and concentration (and multiple attempts) to beat him. But when you can find that level where the bots are better than you but you still have a small chance of winning if you play your best chess, I think that's the sweet spot. Sometimes I play the harder bots even the 3200 engine but it's just fun to throw an effort against that beast, I don't know if I'll ever beat it.
I agree with this 100%. Find a bot that beats you more than you win, but that you often find yourself in 30-40 (or more) move games where you feel like you've got a chance. It's here that you'll be rewarded with a win when you play your best, but still be punished for middle game or endgame mistakes. Goes without saying if you're making opening blunders, you won't last till move 30 against an appropriate bot.
If you want to play a person, lets play... I do not play regularly and am not strong. And I am respectful win, lose or draw.
The beginner and intermediate bots make absurd mistakes that humans would not usually make - like hanging their queens in very obvious situations that no human would miss. Missing a Bishop protecting a long diagonal, hanging an occasional piece, missing a fork, skewer or pin, not counting the number of pieces attacking and defending a square, and knowing very little opening theory - these are mistakes the entry level bots should make. But giving up the queen for no real compensation? No.
Just for grins though, I decided to start at the bottom and work my way up the ladder playing each bot five times. Currently, my record is something like 108-2 - the two losses coming when I was overconfident or tired or playing too quickly or all three. I'm sure I'll hit a wall eventually, but this has been a good exercise in recognizing basic tactics and hanging pieces.
I'm not that great either... I blunder a lot and make poor move choices. That being said, I think that playing bots is beneficial, however they are programmed to play certain lines. A human player, unless they know all the lines, will stray from them and I feel that I learn more by seeing people's choices that stray from what a computer might play. I analyse my games using an external app to see weakness in my play against the human opponents. It really helps. Granted I still blunder quite a bit, but it's all a learning process.
There's nothing wrong with practicing against bots - as long as you are learning from those games.
If the bots are too easy to beat, then there's no point, though. You should play against bots that challenge you, and which are capable of punishing you if you make mistakes - just as it is with human opponents.
Plus some of the bots make the same opening moves over and over
I think I might be a bot
I tried to play some 2300 celebrities fun, it just felt like no matter what opening I did I was playing a cheater that was using the engine to do all the best moves and then throw in some fake moves to make it feel somewhat real lol
First for a little perspective: I am currently--
1. Studying Reti's "Masters of the Chessboard" and Seirawan's "Winning Chess Strategies"--for this week at least.
2. Doing a lot of tactics here on chess.com
3. Playing over great games of the past on chessgames.com and using their "Guess the Move" feature regularly.
4. 72 years old.
I find all of the above activities enjoyable and relaxing, and for a challenge (and to keep my streak alive on chess.com), I play live 5/5 and 10/5. But I don't find that relaxing at all. Yes, the live games are a great challenge and a terrific and unforgiving way to get and stay sharp, but I can't say they're fun. The bots, however, are a breath of fresh air. Even if I'm playing and losing to a much higher-rated bot, the pressure is not nearly what a live game is. Plus, without time controls, I can take a sip of coffee and a few deep breaths and not fall behind. Is this a great way to improve and to increase my rating by several hundred points? No, not really. But . . . see #4 above. 
I'm a very low-rated chess player. I'm learning, but it's a slow process. When I signed up at Chess.com my idea was to only play against "bots". The reason for this is that because I'm such a weak player, it's embarrassing to play "real" opponents. Sadly, some are quite unkind.
I've been told repeatedly that I'm more or less wasting my time playing against bots, and I do agree somewhat. I reached a point where I could beat the "beginner" level bots most of the time. I then started playing "real" opponents and found myself losing every game in short order. It was obvious that humans and bots don't play the same.
I've now gotten over my embarrassment in playing live games, and yes, I've been humiliated by higher-level players. Oh, well. For me, that's part of the learning process. I know that the only way I'll see real improvement involves playing lots of games -- win, lose, or draw.
But I still play against bots. I'm challenging myself now against intermediate level bots. I feel comfortable playing bots because (a) I can try different things, (b) I don't worry about winning or losing, and (c) when I get frustrated or make terrible moves, the bot isn't going to make demeaning comments.
I'm curious though about the differences between human and bot chess play. What makes playing bots such a different experience? Am I really wasting my time by continuing to play against bots as I strive to improve, or can bots be a useful tool in the chess learning toolbox?