that online chess should be clean chess..and those wishing to practise should ask for a new catergory called corresponce chess...or at least advisr there ppponent there using
cheat engines...c.c says it ok?
Sort:
Oct 13, 2013
0
#63
frankyyy27 wrote:
still cheating....is everyone on thi site deluded
It's not cheating. It's a feature of coorespondence chess. It gives the player an opportunity to learn. It's not like plugging in an engine and letting it do all the work for you. A player must understand what they're doing and that takes work. Since both players have this opportunity it's not cheating at all. Over-the-board games, and standard games are different. There, you are only allowed to use the materials in between your ears.
Oct 13, 2013
0
#64
king_nothing1 wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
[snip]
Yeah lets debate. I promise you that I will have an open mind ( though I am worried my brain may fall).... after reading your blog I can say that you strengthen my view. My points:
1. You said that one needs brain to select the right move out from database moves, yes but database significantly narrows your options right? In any given situation, masters game give you 2-5 options and if you compare this with the number of options a 1300 rated player has for that similar position, they will be in the range of 4- more than 10. In any case there is a significant difference between solely using your brain and using your brain after going through database.
2. You wrote in your blog that you not only looked at possible net move but also you thoroughly examined the games (means you also looked into your opponent's possible responses right? )
3. you mentioned that using database for turn based chess is a good training tool for OTB matches.... well I have a better suggestion, look into Houdini's suggested moves as well and go through all the lines it suggests and then make your move. You will learn better and guess what this too requires using your brain.
I had gone through two pages of this thread and basic theme I got from pro database players is that using database is a time standing tradition for turn based chess and it is within the rules ( rather than why it is okay). I agree that it is a tradition in turn based chess and people are within their rights to use that, it is just that I don't agree with this and don't use data base when game is on. I use help when games is finished and it serves me better.
PS...I really enjoyed going through your notation and considering adopting your style in future. :)
Okay. I appreciate your effort.
1. Does the database limit my candidate moves? It might for a 1300 player, although I doubt it. It certainly does not for me. Quite the opposite. In any given opening position, there are normally no more than three moves that I will consider when playing OTB. Using databases during correspondence play (make no mistake, "Online Chess" on Chess.com is correspondence), opens my thinking to more possibilities. Databases increase the number of my candidate moves.
2. Absolutely. Considering my opponent's responses is part of every phase of the chess game. This process is just as true while playing in a bar while drinking, playing in an OTB tournament, or playing online at any time control.
Consider a couple of specific cases:
a. In a typical correspondence game on this site, I will use the Game Explorer to check the candidate moves and the scoring percentage. I assume that my opponent is doing the same. The research begins while exploring several moves deep. Looking through high scoring moves, there is often a move that initially looks good, but there is one less popular move that changes the percentage dramatically. Why? Sometimes that's because an old line has been refuted. Part of the game of correspondence is found in the effort to anticipate how one's opponent is using the Explorer, and use it deeper to steer the game into a line that is more favorable for my side.
Once I get an advantage, there is still much play. At some point, every game will leave the databases. Having used the database to steer the game to a favorable position, I also have given myself a position that is not typical of those I usually play. Having worked harder in the opening because I deviated from my standard repertoire, I now must work harder in an unfamiliar middle game.
b. I offer a game that I played via postcard in 1997-1998. I had a growing collection of books, but no databases. My books included MCO and two volumes of ECO. I also bought one issue of Chess Informant. I was playing the English Opening and Reti as White in most of my OTB games and I had an opening monograph on the opening in addition to ECO, volume A and MCO. I played through several of the English Opening and Reti games in Chess Informant 64 while waiting for my opponent's moves to arrive in the mail.
This game caught my interest:
Ribli,Z - Sherzer,A [A12]
Magyarorszag 64/7, 1995
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.g3 d5 3.Bg2 Bf5 4.d3 e6 5.0–0 Be7 6.c4 c6 7.b3 0–0 8.Bb2 Nbd7 9.Nbd2 a5 10.a3 h6 11.Qc2 Bh7 12.Bc3 b5 13.cxb5 cxb5 14.Qb2 Qb6 15.b4 axb4 16.axb4 Rfc8 17.Rxa8 Rxa8 18.Nb3 Bd6 19.Ra1 Re8 20.Bd4 Qb8 21.Bc5 e5 22.Ra6 Nxc5 23.bxc5 Bc7 24.d4 e4 25.Ne5 Bxe5 26.dxe5 Nd7 27.Qd4 Nxe5 28.Qxd5 Nc4 29.Bh3 e3 30.f3 Rd8 31.Bd7 Qc7 32.Ra8 Bc2 33.Bf5 1–0
In particular, White's move 14 suggested a strategic idea that was new for me: using the queen to support rook action on the a- and b-files, and using her to support action of the bishop aloong the long diagonal. My game never reached this position. Nonetheless, the growth of my underdtanding of the strategic ideas helped guide me to victory in this game.
I discuss this game in more detail at http://chessskill.blogspot.com/2011/03/playing-by-book.html. My opponent was a well-known chess promoter (he founded New York's Chess in the Schools program). I do have quite a few blog posts concerning database use. Feel free to poke around and read some that I have not linked to here.
3. Of course, using an engine is good preparation for OTB. I use engines for training. However, rules do matter. Using engines to analyze games in progress is against the rules on this site. I do not do it.
Using engines to prepare a repertoire, however, is not only useful, it is something that I find essential. Again, I find a specific instance useful to illustrate. In 2008, through a few strokes of luck I qualified to play in my city's championship--a two player match of four games. I was a strong B Class USCF player at the time (~1740). My opponent, the reigning City Champion was a FIDE Master, but no longer at his peak rating. He had been in the mid-2400s in his youth, but had dropped to 2250.
As luck would have it, he had a fairly limited opening repertoire. He played the Advance Variation against the French. He played the Dutch Defense as Black against queen's pawn openings. I learned a new line against the Advance variation, and I spent a lot of time working on the Raphael variation against the Dutch. In my preparation (I had about three weeks), I managed to draw HIARCS 10 in a fifteen minute game. In the match, I lost the first game badly. It was played on Thursday night. Games two and three were on Saturday. A friend of mine (an expert) and I spend all morning Friday using engines, Chess Informants, and database refining my line against the Dutch.
I had Black in game two, and played a long game that was almost drawn. I earned the FIDE master's respect. I earned a draw in game three. There was no game four, because my opponent had the 2 1/2 points needed to win the match.
The games are posted at http://www.spokanechessclub.org/gamecorner.htm.
On some sites, and in many correspondence associations (ICCF for instance) engines are allowed during correspondence play. I have played this sort of chess, sometimes called "advanced chess". I played on another site that encourages it. Yesterday, at the OTB tournament I am playing in this weekend, I was discussing this form of chess with friend who played some ICCF events. We both quit because of the added effort needed. He said it was like having a second job.
It is possible to play engine assisted correspondence chess (on Chess.com, these games must be unrated and by mutual agreement). For me, the level of database research needed to play well in correspondence chess on this site makes the game more satisfying. Engine assisted correspondence chess is less appealing. Nonetheless, that too, could help one's OTB game if done well.
I usually have ten to twenty games going at once. I play here, on another site, and am currently using two iOS apps, and Chessimo on Facebook. The last of these does not allow database use, and I don't use databases in those games. In my games where databases are allowed, I use them selectively. I do not reference them at all in 1/3 - 1/2 of my games, use them sparingly in a few, and do deep research in a few.
In my highest rated win on this site, my opponent walked into a known trap that I had studied for less than two hours in Starting Out: The King's Indian two years before the game. I then had to convert the advantage of an exchange, which I did by steering the game rapidly to an ending where I could return the exchange to go into a favorable pawn ending. I did not use databases in that game. My memory served me well.
My opponent was later banned. I suspect that he was using the Explorer weakly and poorly before turning on his engine, by which time it was too late.
Oct 13, 2013
0
#65
If you suspect someone, please use the Help link at the bottom of the page. When that page opens, click on the left side option where it says Contact Us and submit a 'Suspected Cheat' ticket.
Also see this page
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/chesscom-policy-on-cheating
We provide tools to report cheating to our staff. But having several constant and redundant threads on the topic that circulate with the same questions and comments over and over again isn't helpful, and instead causes people to worry more than they need to. If you want to discuss cheating, please do it in this group
http://www.chess.com/groups/home/cheating-forum
No Cheating or Computer Help
You can NEVER use chess programs (Chessmaster, Fritz, etc) to analyze current ongoing games unless specifically permitted (such as a computer tournament, etc). The only type of computer assistance allowed is games databases for opening lines in Turn-based Chess and Vote Chess. You cannot receive ANY outside assistance on Live Chess games.
http://support.chess.com/Knowledgebase/Article/View/124/0/cheaters--cheating-what-you-need-to-know
http://support.chess.com/Knowledgebase/Article/View/63/0/can-i-use-computers-or-outside-help-in-my-vote-chess-game
http://support.chess.com/Knowledgebase/Article/View/132/0/playing-live-chess-on-chesscom
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/chesscom---list-of-caught-cheaters
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/chesscom-policy-on-cheating
3. Using database means opening database on your chess GUI and if one does it, 99.99 % he would have a look on position evaluation if not the next move.
I will guess that your 99.99% is grossly exaggerated.
Otherwise, the cheaters list would be increasing at an alarming rate, and we couldn´t even finish our tournaments since most of our oponnents will be dissapearing every day.