Writing down your possible opening moves?

It's easier to have a PGN file, but even that gets messy after a while. I prefer to make a new file for a very different opening. Note there is no real need for an extensive tree if you already have an opening book you are following. It suffices to just write down the pages :P

Then don't do it. But dont accuse others of cheating if it is within the rules just because you don't like the rules.

And there is a HUGE difference between using a chess engine and consulting written material during a Correspondence Chess game. An engine tells you what to move, consulting opening notes or referencing databases of games still makes you responsible for picking which move to make.

You're just being .... nevermind, it's not worth it.

Cool minds here till comment #50. That keeps things from getting out of hand.

No it's not cheating, and not the same as using an engine PROVIDED that an engine was not used to create the notes.  If you are White, and you just made your 19th move, and you are using a board or an opening manual (let's say it's 19 book moves of the Classical King's Indian) to take notes on your 20th, 21st, 22nd, and 23rd moves based on if conditions of Black's moves, that perfectly legal.  If you are using a computer to figure out your 20th move based on each legal 19th move by Black, and then try to make the argument that you didn't use a computer to make your 20th move because at the time that it became your 20th move, you didn't turn rybka on, you are kidding yourself.  You cheated.

Correspondence Chess is different than Over The Board chess.  The winner is usually the one that does the best opening research (as opposed to posessing the better opening memory) along with the best middlegame and endgame skills (assuming neither player cheats - if they do, it's converts to who is the best cheater).

Why to refer to the notes during a game? Notes can be written so that you can resume your study later, to make conclusions about different lines so that you'll be able to choose one more easily, etc. One can refer to any written material available, including openinig theory, but that doesn't mean one shouldn't make notes. If written opening studies are to be dismissed as cheating, so should be all kinds of written chess theory.

How this post got past 10 comments?

The rules are already laid out. No amount of ranting is going to change it.

I would not be so sure... Let's pick pitchforks and torches and go cut the FIDE president's head off.

(but no amount of ranting coming from 10 persons on a chess.com forum, sure)

Never, never, never get near him as he is in the White House bunker.

Where exactly is the Chess Position Trainer? I'd like to give it a try.

www.chesspositiontrainer.com

it seems to me the rules have become outdated, not keeping up with modern times. It's within the rules in Correspondence chess (online chess at this site) to use books during the game, but almost all chess book authors nowdays use engines to help them in writing the books. So if we are consulting an opening book, looking to see what the author says we are suppose to be doing against what our opponent played, then we are actually using engine help during the game - the author's engine. The only way to prevent this is to change the rule, books only being allowed to learn from before and after a game, and only databases allowed during the game. Until that becomes the new rule I'm going to continue to open up books during my games, for if I don't do so then I'm not on a level playing field with my opponent. 

The huge difference is that the book lead you no further that what is written inside.

When using a book, you take the risk that one of lines is either refuted or leads to a position you do not know how to play. This is not the case when using a computer where you can request any position you want.

Also worth remembering that if you have your notes at your side during an online game [not correspondence] then this is totally verboten, and if you do have a 'handy list' I would imagine the temptation to peak would be too much for some.  You'll feel happier & play better if you try to remember as much as you can, and begin to recognise structural shapes as this will help you understand better when a position could transpose into another opening system that you might want to steer the game towards.

Many people try to take games 'out of the book' as fast as possible, so if you've learnt your tree by rote you'll feel stumped when your opponent plays something totally unexpected. 

The temptation to peak is not really that great. Learning an opening tree by rote and not knowing what to do when your opponent deviates is a strawman. The assumption that the process of writting opening notes is detrimental to your memory is false and misguided; writing is only one step in the proccess some sort of analysis is needed. 

On an unrelated note, pen and paper give you more options for organizing your opening notes then a PGN file does. You should of course, not put every opening you play on the same page or in the same PGN file.