Is Playing Bots Worthwhile or a waste of time?

Actually programming has advanced to the point where the bots play much closer to humans than ever before.  Used to be when the computer dumbed itself down, it would play perfect chess for awhile and then deliberately blunder.  The bots play remarkably mediocre chess much of the time so I'd say they're worth playing as long as you remember they are a bit over rated here.  It is true though that most of them have a pretty rubbish end game.  Why not play a few dozen games against them and make up your own mind?

If you want to avoid making blunders then it's a great training since CPUs are likely to just punish you. Traps and tactics usually don't work, just play the better positional chess.

Overall, playing humans is best.

I have a question about bots.

¿ do they remember that you already played against them or is there a complete reset everytime you play against the same bot again ?

Thanks

It's new each time.

Thank You Martin

I'm still really new and find that I have learned from playing them. This is especially true with the bots who have playing styles that irritate me (like Nelson lol).

The 250 rated bot(Martin)is said to be for beginners but he'll gift you all of his pieces for nothing. That is lower than a beginner's level. So it really matters on the rating. I like playing Maximum engine rated 3200.

Let me emphasise this:as much as I play Martin to cheer up after losing a public game, Martin is not helpful to learn unless you want to practice checkmates.

Generally it is much better to play against humans if you wish to improve. Playing bots is not effective for this. But if you want to have some fun, then it is not a waste of time.

Yes crick2.

Also Martin is like analysis board

It doesnt matter, human or bot, it is the way how you can learn?

Generally, you should play within +/-200 rating range. If your opponent rating is too low, you learn little as you win easily. If your opponent is too strong, you learn little as you always lose.

Pro/Cons with bots- more repetitive- better training for accuracy.

Pro/Cons with human- more unpredictable- less training for accuracy. 

As long as we're not talking about the bots that make ridiculous blunders...

I'd say:

Bots force you to play for something other than simple tricks but don't know how to pose practical problems to you the way a human will. Humans will play a wider range of openings against you. Human games are timed.

So play bots for accuracy or to practice with/against a particular opening. Play humans for when you're trying to put all your various skills and knowledge together into a cohesive game.

I think that playing with bots is not a waste of time

On the other hand though, even with bots like Martin, you can't checkmate him in 2 moves. And based on other members' experiences, I have heard that some of the beginner bots are easier to beat than the easiest bot on chesskid.

It actually depends on which bot you play against. I agree with aviation18 - the beginner bots are useless if you want to get better. However, when you play against the higher bots or the top player bots, you can really learn lots about the moves that they play.

I think someone else also mentioned this. If you keep playing lower rated players, you're not going to learn as you will repeatedly beat them. If you keep playing higher rated players, you won't learn as you'll keep getting beaten. Overall the computer is better to learn with than a random human.

It shouldn't do any harm. It's just extra practice, and because there isn't any time concerns, it is a great place for experimentation before you play someone real