E.L.O. was a 70's rock band.
Dr. Arpad Elo was the name of the guy who developed the rating system used in chess.
E.L.O. "Inaccuracy"
Sort:
This has been asked (and answered) many times.
The bots are very much overrated so it is normal to beat higher rated bots consistently.
This is true at least for the bots rated 2000 and under.
justbefair wrote:
E.L.O. was a 70's rock band.
Dr. Arpad Elo was the name of the guy who developed the rating system used in chess.
Elo was a professional physicist.
Elo is like Celsius or Fahrenheit, Volt, Watt, Ohm, etc . . .
I'm a new chess player that's been playing quasi/semi actively for the better part of two months, shown interest in the game and just generally understood how it works for about 3/4 of a year. My 10-15m E.L.O. is currently in the 500s, (with a peak of 580ish) yet my highest Chess.com bot that I've ever beaten is "Isabel", who has a rating of 1600, over 3x mine. I am by no means horrible at the game, but anybody reading this could most likely give my butt a whooping any day of the week. I'm at the learning curve now to where if I want to progressively get better at the game, and actually make considerable progress I'd actually have to try and learn openings/strategies/theory, and dedicate much more time to the game and not just rely on the backbone of "understanding how to play the game" and being a fast learner, yet I'm not acting on any of the things I've listed. I can consistently beat bots that are rated around 2x-3x my rating (think : Nelson, Antonio, Isabel), yet when I hop online against an actual person, it's always very equal, and I play against people my E.L.O, and can never seem to get passed that learning curve. I definitely would understand if Chess.com made certain bots have different characteristics with their play-styles, making it to where when players are trying to climb the ladder to higher rankings, they come across different playing strategies that they have to learn to outmaneuver, making it to where some beginning players find it easier to beat other certain bots, based on their instinctive playing style regardless of ELO, and that Chess bots aren't really the most faithful representation of actual ELO ratings, yet beating people 3x my rating seems a bit excessive/unrealistic, and just flat out weird.
I can't find the specific video, but I saw a video on youtube by "ChessVibes" about how a man in his later years, who was around my same ELO rating on chess.com, beat one of the "Daryl Morey" bot, who's 1550, and made it seem like a pretty big deal, Yet this isn't unusual to me, my question is this : Is it unusual for beginner players (prodigies aside) to beat Chess.com bots 2-3x their rating? If so, than this was kinda a useless post, yet I wanted to see if this was a normal thing, to make sure that I truly was not lacking behind on ELO on my part, any advice/general 'word-of-mouth' [common knowledge] is greatly appreciated! Thanks and God bless.