Testing old chess computers through emulation

In the days before everyone had computers, if you wanted to play chess, your only option was to play with another person. In the late 1970's Fidelity introduced a series of electronic computer chess games. These early models played rather poorly, but I knew people who bought them just to be able to play and practice whenever they wanted. I managed to borrow a few of these so that I could get a feel for how well they played.

Although the early machines did not play well, things started to improve in the 1980s. There was a golden age of dedicated chess computers that went from 1983 to about 1993.  In 1984, I purchased the Novag Super Constellation electronic chess game for what I think was $200, which was quite a bit of money in 1984. The U.S. Chess Federation had given it a rating of 2018, which is better than at least 90% of all adult tournament players. Any rating between 2000 and 2199 is considered to be the skill level of "Expert" and a higher rating of 2200 is considered to be "Master."

Although I am currently rated 2016, at the time I bought the Novag Super Constellation I was rated just a little over 1700. In a few months, I would reach a rating of 1800 which is considered to be "Class A." Nevertheless, what I remember about the Novag Super Constellation is that it played better than me, which is surprising since it only contains an 8-bit processor running at just 4 MHZ. That is not very fast compared to modern 64-bit processors with multiple cores running at gigahertz speeds.

Over time, I bought a couple of better chess-playing computers and I have fond memories of practicing with all of them. I sold all these machines when I got a desktop computer in the mid-'90s, but I kind of regret it because they all were fun to play with it.

This became an issue when I was researching these old chess-playing computers where I saw many online claims that these computers were not as good as the ratings that had been assigned to them. For example, I saw the claim that the Novag Super Constellation was only about 1750 strength, and two other computers that I owned rated 2100 and 2265 were also claimed to be weaker than their advertised ratings. None of these claims match my experience, since all of the computers played better than I did.

I was so curious about this that I wanted to get my hands on one of the old chess computers, assuming that one can be found, however unlikely, and see how it compares to my current chess ability. Fortunately, I found software that allows me to emulate dozens of old chess computers on my Windows PC.

In my first game against the emulated Novag Super Constellation on level 1, the lowest level, I was able to win by only the slimmest of margins. I tried the same thing on the Fidelity Designer 2100, a slightly better machine, and I lost. I have no doubt that the other computer I owned, the stronger Fidelity Designer 2265, would stomp me like it used to when I played it 30 years ago. I will confirm this eventually.

So I tested a variety of chess computers with a somewhat difficult chess problem..

Most serious chess players have seen this problem already and know the answer. However, if they were not familiar with it, the solution might be difficult for them to find in a real game. There is the more direct solution of 6. Nxe5 Bxd1 7. Bxf7+ Ke7 8. Nd5# (checkmate). However, for a computer to see the solution it also has to see 6... Nxe5 7. Qxh5 Nxc4 8. Qb5+ c6 9. Qxc4. There is also 7... Nf6 8. Qe2 Nxc4 9. Qxc4. Either way, that is 7 half-moves deep, which is pretty deep for ancient chess computers to look.

Based upon my testing, this is how long various chess computers take to solve this chess problem...

#	Model	Year	Processor	Speed	ROM	Time	Depth	Nodes/S
1.	Fidelity Chess Challenger 10	1978	Z80	4 MHZ	4K	Fails
2.	Fidelity Chess Challenger 7	1979	Z80	4 MHZ	4K	12 hours
3.	Novag Savant	1981	Z80	6 MHZ	24K	12:40m
4.	Novag Savant II	1982	Z80	6 MHZ	32K	12:33m
5.	Novag Constellation	1983	6502	2 MHZ	16K	6:46m
6.	Constellation 3.6 ROM set 1	1984	6502	3.6 MHZ	16K	3:30m*
7.	Constellation 3.6 ROM set 2	1986	6502	3.6 MHZ	16K	3:33m*	5 ply
8.	Novag Super Constellation	1984	6502	4 MHZ	56K	2:10m	5 ply
9.	Constellation Expert	1985	65C02	5 MHZ	64K	1:54m	5 ply
10.	Novag Forte A	1986	65C02	5 MHZ	64K	2:15m	5 ply	~1000
11.	Novag Forte B	1986	65C02	5 MHZ	64K	1:58m	5 ply	~1000
12.	Novag Super Forte	1987	65C02	5 MHZ	64K	1:13m	5 ply	~1350
13.	Novag Super Expert A	1987	65C02	5 MHZ	64K	1:00m	5 ply	~1100
14.	Novag Super Forte B	1989	65C02	5 MHZ	64K	30s	5 ply	~1400
15.	Novag Super Expert B	1989	65C02	5 MHZ	64K	19s	5 ply	~1375
16.	Novag Super Forte C	1990	65C02	5 MHZ	64K	11s	5 ply	~1500
17.	Novag Super Nova	1990	HD6301Y	4 MHZ	32KK	10s	4 ply
18.	Novag Super Expert C	1990	65C02	5 MHZ	64K	6s	5 ply	~1050
19.	Novag Scorpio 68000	1990	68000	16 MHZ	98K	9s
20.	Novag Diablo 68000	1990	68000	16 MHZ	98K	9s
21.	Fidelity Excellence	1985	65C02	3 MHZ	16K	2:16m	5 ply
22.	Fidelity Excellence	1985	65C02	4 MHZ	16K	2:00m	5 ply
23.	Fidelity Designer Display 2000	1989	65C02	3 MHZ	32K	1:45m	5 ply	~81
24.	Fidelity Par Excellence	1986	65C02	5 MHZ	32K	1:22m	5 ply
25.	Fidelity Designer Display 2100	1988	65C02	6 MHZ	64K	54s	5 ply	~180
26.	Fidelity Designer Display 2265	1989	68000	16 MHZ	64K	5s	3 ply
27.	Fidelity Designer Display 2325	1991	68020	20 MHZ	64K	3s	4 ply
28.	Chessmaster NES	1990	6502	1.79 MHZ	48K	7:00m	5 ply
29.	Chessmaster Super Nintendo	1991	65816	3.58 MHZ	110K	4:43m	5 ply
30.	Chessmaster 2000 (DOS)	1986	?	?	NA	1:33m
31.	Chessmaster 3000 (DOS)	1991	?	?	NA	4s	4 ply
32.	Stockfish 14.1 2017-iMac	2022	i5	3.4 GHZ One Core	NA	<1s	<12 ply	~880,000

It is noteworthy that the Super Constellation solved the problem in roughly 2 minutes, which is within tournament time controls. I am disappointed in Chessmaster on the Super Nintendo because it failed to achieve this. It is running on a similar processor, and it is a port of Chessmaster 2000 written by Dave Kittinger, who also wrote the Super Constellation program!

* The second version of the Constellation 3.6 solves this problem on its top two tournament levels, but the first version moves too quickly to see the answer.  It can only solve the problem on its infinite level, even though it takes about the same amount of time to see the solution. The second ROM set is based upon the Novag Expert program.

Super Constellation game #1.

Chat GPT

Talk about Paul Morphy.

Paul Morphy (1837-1884) was an American chess player who is widely regarded as one of the greatest chess players of all time. He was born in New Orleans, Louisiana, and began playing chess at a very young age, learning the game from his father and uncle. Morphy showed an early talent for chess and quickly developed his skills.

In 1857, Morphy traveled to New York to compete in the first American Chess Congress. He won the tournament, defeating several of the best players in the country, including Alexander Beaufort Meek and Louis Paulsen. Following his success in New York, Morphy traveled to Europe to compete against the best chess players in the world.

In Europe, Morphy quickly established himself as a dominant force in chess. He defeated many of the top players of the time, including Adolf Anderssen, the winner of the 1851 London Chess Tournament, and Howard Staunton, the leading English player. Morphy's style of play was aggressive and attacking, and he was known for his brilliant combinations and sacrifices.

Despite his success, Morphy's career was relatively short-lived. He retired from competitive chess at the age of 21 and returned to his law studies in Louisiana. Morphy's retirement from chess was a great loss to the game, and many chess historians speculate about what he might have achieved had he continued to play.

Despite his brief career, Morphy's contributions to chess have been significant. He was one of the first players to emphasize the importance of developing the pieces in the opening, and he introduced several new attacking ideas that are still used by chess players today. Morphy's games continue to be studied and admired by chess players around the world, and he remains one of the most celebrated figures in the history of the game.

Talk about Paul Morphy in the style of Jordan Peterson

Well, Paul Morphy was a fascinating figure, and his story speaks to many of the fundamental aspects of human nature that I often discuss in my work.

Morphy was a brilliant chess player, and his success can be attributed in part to his extraordinary talent and dedication. But I believe that there were deeper psychological factors at play that contributed to his greatness.

Morphy was deeply curious and passionate about the game of chess, and he devoted himself to mastering its intricacies and strategies. He was also a natural risk-taker, unafraid to take bold moves and make sacrifices in pursuit of victory.

But I think what really sets Morphy apart is his ability to channel his emotions and intuition into his play. He was known for his aggressive style, which often involved sacrificing pieces in order to gain an advantage. This kind of bold, intuitive play requires a deep understanding of oneself and one's emotions, as well as the ability to channel those emotions into productive action.

Morphy's story also illustrates the importance of pursuing one's passions, even in the face of opposition or criticism. Morphy's family did not always support his interest in chess, and he faced significant challenges and setbacks throughout his career. But he remained committed to his love of the game, and ultimately achieved great success as a result.

In conclusion, Paul Morphy's life and career exemplify many of the themes that I often explore in my work - the importance of pursuing one's passions, the power of intuition and emotion, and the role of risk-taking and determination in achieving greatness. He was a remarkable figure who continues to inspire and fascinate people to this day.

Was Paul Morphy crazy?

There is no evidence to suggest that Paul Morphy was clinically insane or suffering from any kind of mental illness. While he did exhibit some eccentricities in his behavior, such as his tendency to pace and mutter to himself during games, these are not necessarily indicators of mental illness.

Some historians have suggested that Morphy may have suffered from obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), based on his reported need to touch each chess piece before making a move. However, this is purely speculative and there is no way to know for sure.

It's worth noting that Morphy lived in a time when mental illness was not well understood, and people with mental health issues were often stigmatized or marginalized. As a result, it's possible that Morphy's behavior may have been misinterpreted or unfairly judged by his contemporaries.

In any case, while Morphy was certainly a unique and sometimes eccentric figure, there is no reason to believe that he was insane or suffering from any kind of mental illness. Instead, he was a brilliant and passionate chess player who dedicated his life to mastering the game that he loved.

Was Bobby Fischer crazy?

Bobby Fischer was a legendary American chess player who achieved international fame for his historic victory over Boris Spassky in the 1972 World Chess Championship. Fischer's behavior in his later years was often erratic and controversial, leading some people to speculate that he may have been mentally ill.

It's difficult to say for certain whether or not Fischer was clinically insane or suffered from a mental illness, as he was never formally diagnosed. However, he did exhibit many symptoms of mental illness, including paranoia, delusions, and extreme mood swings.

Fischer's behavior became increasingly erratic in the years following his victory over Spassky, and he became known for his controversial public statements and bizarre behavior. He also became increasingly reclusive and isolated, cutting off contact with many of his friends and family members.

Some experts have suggested that Fischer may have suffered from a form of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, which could explain his erratic behavior and extreme moods. However, this is purely speculative, and without a formal diagnosis, it's impossible to know for sure.

In any case, it's clear that Fischer's later years were marked by significant mental and emotional turmoil. While his contributions to the game of chess remain significant, it's important to remember that he was a complex and troubled individual who struggled with a range of personal and psychological challenges.

Are you TRULY PASSIONATE About Chess? ♟ #chess #ichess #chessplayer

https://youtube.com/shorts/w2WjRGQp_mg?feature=share

The voice is Steve Jobs, and he is talking about computer and software development, but it applies to chess equally well.

Are Magnus and Hikaru friends? #chess

https://youtube.com/shorts/sbUPOPB5H-0?feature=share



Best wishes,

John Coffey

New CHEATER in the Chess World

https://youtube.com/shorts/D6C9LFFd7no?feature=share

Best wishes,

John Coffey

One Thousand Positions to Chess Mastery: Black to play

https://onethousandpositionstochessmastery.blogspot.com/2023/02/black-to-play.html

Chess Game

No surprise here. I've done this trap maybe dozens of times.

[Event "Columbus Chess Club"]
[Site "Lewelyn Center"]
[Date "Feb 9, 2023"]
[Round "2"]
[White "John Coffey"]
[Black "John Tasca"]
[Result "1-0"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. c3 d6 4. d4 cxd4 5. cxd4 Bg4 6. d5 Ne5 7. Nxe5 Bxd1 8.
Bb5+ Qd7 9. Bxd7+ Kd8 10. Nxf7+ Kxd7 11. Kxd1 h6 12. Nxh8 Nf6 13. Nc3 g5 14.
Ng6 Bg7 15. e5 Ng4 16. e6+ Ke8 17. Ke2 Bd4 18. h3 Ne5 19. Nxe5 Bxe5 20. f4 gxf4
21. Rf1 Kd8 22. Bxf4 Bxf4 23. Rxf4 Kc7 24. Rf7 Re8 25. Rc1
1-0


Best wishes,

John Coffey

THE CHESSBOARD GAME!

This seems like a lot of trouble.

https://youtu.be/bR3LCNuOuHU

They get the board setup wrong every time.

Best wishes,

John Coffey

Draw by resignation?

Draw by resignation: Under FIDE Laws, a game is drawn if a player resigns and no sequence of legal moves would allow the opponent to checkmate that player.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess

5.1.2    The game is lost by the player who declares he/she resigns (this immediately ends the game), unless the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player's king by any possible series of legal moves. In this case the result of the game is a draw.

https://handbook.fide.com/chapter/E012023

Apparently, this is a new rule.  Common practice would be that the player who resigns loses the game regardless.

This doesn't seem to be part of the U.S. Chess Federation rules, meaning that this rule would only apply to international tournaments.

http://www.uschess.org/docs/gov/chessrules/US_Chess_Rule_Book-%20Online_Only_Edition_v7.1-1.2.11-7.19.19.pdf

Win At Chess In 4 Moves - YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSt75fFb5tI

I would not normally recommend playing this way.