Guh

Dave: 11
Chessica: 45
Stalemate: 1

Still inside the 5:1 ratio, so I've gained a bit of ground, although Chessica's been stomping me lately.

Getting better...

Dave: 9
Chessica: 37
Stalemate: 1

Oh, yeah. Sure, she picked up some games, but I smoked Chessica in three matches yesterday. I'm lean, I'm hungry. Okay, maybe not lean, but definitely hungry.

Stalemate

Dave: 6
Chessica: 31
Stalemate: 1

I fought Chessica to a tie game this morning, a stalemate. And even then, it was because we'd gone 70-something moves, and I think we could've gone another 100 moves. I had my King and a Rook, she had her King and a Bishop -- purely on points, I had the edge on her, which felt like a victory, given that Chessica had me on the ropes in the middle game, with something like seven Pawns all trying to get promoted to Queen. She managed to promote two to Queen, but I wasted both of them, and them methodically took down the other five Pawns until that endgame scenario, where we then fought across the board awhile, before I aced her Bishop with my Rook, and she aced my Rook with her King, leaving us King-to-King, which is a stalemate.

So, playing for a tie after a game I should've lost actually felt like a victory, and was pretty satisfying, given where I was in the middle game. Playing against a computer (which doesn't make mistakes), it's nice to be able to get around it and force the tie.

I'm strongest in the middle game, so I was pleased that I managed to play a solid endgame against overwhelming odds.

I checked Chessica's levels out, and I'm playing at Level 15, which sounds swell, although Chessica has something like 136 levels of play available, capable of beating 99% of chess players, like a rating of 2000. So, I've got a long, long way to go. When I first played Chessica at Level 1, I smoked it in like three moves, so Level 1 is for pikers; after that win, I cranked it up to 15 and that's where it's been since then. I won't up the level until I can up my wins enough to where I can consistently beat Chessica, so with the 5:1 ratio still holding, it'll be awhile, though today's stalemate was a promising development in our ongoing contention.

I'll fight to the bitter end, rather than taking a dive, even against a superior adversary -- "surrender" is a four-letter word to me. It always bugs me when I read matches where the other player resigns because they lose a key piece. Those wusses who resign because somebody nabbed their Queen? C'mon, deal with it. You fight until either you're dead, or the opponent's wasted. Win or die. Don't give me that resignation stuff. I think it's something to do with playing for points at the tournament level, like these guys don't want to lose points by fighting on or something like that. It has to be something like that, but if I'm beaten, I want to be actually defeated, rather than raising the white flag and saying "You win!"

But then, I'm from Rohan. Surrender is just so Gondorian, all milk-livered and whey-faced.

Bored, yet?

To quote Vizzini from A Princess Bride: "Wait til' I get going!"

Yeah...

Dave: 6
Chessica: 30

I won one this morning, although Chessica's 5 to 1 edge persists for the moment. Still, it was nice to have taken one, and decisively. The computer kind of lays down and dies when it's beaten, whereas I'll fight on to the bitter end, but then, Chessica's neither Scots nor Irish.

Tactical versus Positional

Dave: 5
Chessica: 26

Yeah, basically for every one of my wins, Chessica wins over five. For now, for now. I nearly won four more games, but Chessica flatly outplayed me at the endgame. The curious thing about the computer is that it'll roll over and play dead once you've got it -- you'll see it make moves where you're like "Huh??" and you realize it's the chess computer equivalent of desperation.

I'm a fighter, so I'll keep after it until I turn those numbers around. The challenge always with a chess computer is that it masters positional play -- perfect, set-piece play that creates a spiderweb on the board that's very difficult to crack. I'm not a positional player; I'm currently a sloppy tactical player, and always will be tactical, though I should eventually be able to diminish the slop. My hope is that I can work on my game and improve my tactics, and then turn things around, because I'm never going to be a positional type of player -- that style of play oppresses me (even though it is impressive to watch a good positional player create a marvelous trap on the board). So, all I can hope for is to be the best tactician I can be, because I'll never be a strategist.

The advantage of it is that you can "outwit" the computer once your tactics get good enough, or at least outmaneuver it on the board, despite its elegant positional tricks and traps. I'm amazed that this handheld chess computer is as good as it is, given that the last one I had was about the size of a dinner tray. Gotta love miniaturization. My favorite chess program was Chessmaster, which was on an old PC I had in the 90s. That thing was positively deadly -- any win against it was hard-fought, although Chessica's no slouch, obviously.

Once I eventually turn around my string of defeats, I'll eventually up the level of the computer to force me to work that much harder, figuring it's got to be good for the brain. I haven't played chess like this since the 90s, so it's fun to get back into it, even to realize that I'm out of practice, and Chessica is currently making me its chess-bitch.

The Last Laugh

Dave: 4
Chessica: 15

The joke's on me, eh?

Gruh.

Dave: 4
Chessica: 11