Is it "cheating...

Do you consider it cheating to use a book to help u in a tournament, with openings u are not familiar with?

If you are talking about turn-based chess, then no, this is not cheating. The rules state "You may NOT get any help from any person or any chess engine that analyzes your specific position, including tablebases. You MAY use books, magazines, or other articles. You may also use computer databases (including Chess.com's Game Explorer)."

If you are playing Live Chess, any type of assistance at all is cheating.

I think it should be cheating as you are not really playing against your opponent.  You are playing against Game Explorer or a book or a computer program.

If you want to join a group that is dedicated to not using these programs/books then you should look into joining the Circle of trust group.

'Turn based' appears to be essentially correspondence chess under a new name.  I would think the same things allowed in correspondence chess - reference books, etc. - would be acceptable in turn based chess.

It's allowed and very instructive too!

CJBas wrote: 'Turn based' appears to be essentially correspondence chess under a new name.  I would think the same things allowed in correspondence chess - reference books, etc. - would be acceptable in turn based chess.

---

 This is correct. Turn based chess is basically an evolution of correspondance or postal chess.

The naming is a little odd, because how is OTB chess (or live internet chess) not based on taking turns??

Loomis wrote: The naming is a little odd, because how is OTB chess (or live internet chess) not based on taking turns??

---

 I'm not sure where that naming convention started, but a lot of websites use "turn based" to mean any game (not just chess) where both players do not have to be logged on at the same time in order to play.

thank you gentlemen for your comments. advancement in chess seems to have much to do with memorizing moves. i find it extremely helpful to read annotated games and/or openings and such as i play. generally, at my level, the openings only follow "the book" to the 5th or 6 th move, and after that, i'm on my own anyway. referencing other books on strategy and such helps me understand what weaknesses i should be looking to exploit, or what strengths i should be looking to develop.

I can appreciate the point of view that says that using any kind of assistance (books, databases) is receiving help and should be disallowed. But I am a big proponent of this type of assistance, because they have helped me a LOT. I think about all the times, while I am playing blitz internet chess, when I think "man I don't know this opening very well and I should really add this to the list of openings that I want to brush up on" -- well turn-based internet correspondence chess is the answer.

ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote: I can appreciate the point of view that says that using any kind of assistance (books, databases) is receiving help and should be disallowed. But I am a big proponent of this type of assistance, because they have helped me a LOT. I think about all the times, while I am playing blitz internet chess, when I think "man I don't know this opening very well and I should really add this to the list of openings that I want to brush up on" -- well turn-based internet correspondence chess is the answer.

---

HAAA!!!  So that's how you beat me, eh?  lol

Grayhound wrote:

I think it should be cheating as you are not really playing against your opponent.  You are playing against Game Explorer or a book or a computer program.

If you want to join a group that is dedicated to not using these programs/books then you should look into joining the Circle of trust group.

---

I wish I had a dollar for everytime someone on this site throws around the word "cheating." Honestly, it gets a bit tiresome. If you want to know what is and is not cheating, then read the rules. Threads like this are unnecessary because there is a very clear description of what can be used and what cannot. As has been pointed out, "turn-based" chess is just an electronic version of correspondence chess. Correspondence chess is not the same as over-the-board chess. If you want to play OTB, then by all means do so. No one will hold a gun to your head and make you play correspondence chess. But referring to playing CC according to CC rules as "cheating," is just silly.

The better question for a player to ask is whether playing CC chess will hamper or help improve his or her game. That is something you need to think about because using the CC tools -- like the analysis board, databases, and opening books -- may be crutches that hold you back.

I have found CC to be a great help in my improving my understanding of the game. I'm not fooling myself, however, into thinking that it helps develop the skills needed for OTB like quick sight of the board and calculating without moving the pieces.

The statementI think it should be cheating as you are not really playing against your opponent.  You are playing against Game Explorer or a book or a computer program

demonstrates misunderstandings: (1) If you are using a computer program that has an algorithm -- that is, something like Fritz that will tell you what to play, then that is cheating, as is clearly stated in the rules. (2) You are mistaken to think that opening books and databases utterly level the playing field so that your own chess skill disappears. Those things replace your need to memorize theory. They don't give you a true understanding of chess sufficient to get through the near infinite variations of the middle game.

I believe that all the analysis books and references you can find may help understanding of the game and help your play improve, on the other hand it could act as a crutch whereas  a person may rely on those mediums to get through a game.  In which case it may not make a bit of difference in games over the board where your opponent may just be sharper.  Imagine playing Magnus Carlsen or Garry Kasparov with all the books at your disposal.  Chances are unless you are in their class of competition it wouldn't matter.  Kasparov will forever be known as the man that was beaten by a computer, but in the end he was only beaten in 1 match and beat the computer many times over and what exactly was the information used in the programming of such a super computer?

I guess what I'm saying is cheating is all relative.  So read the rules!

 

rich wrote: It's cheating to recieve help in live chess. But even in Turn based chess no one would know if you was getting help from someone at you're home.

---

 Actually, at least two people would know you were getting help: you and the helper or helpers. Not being caught is not the same as not cheating.

 It must not be cheating for turn based chess if Baseballfan,a member of the staff, said so. I may start useing a chess book for turn based chess now.

The rule is stated here:

http://support.chess.com/index.php?_m=knowledgebase&_a=viewarticle&kbarticleid=17

It is interesting that although we have something like 20,000+ members -- if I remember right -- there have only been about 2200 views of this statement of the rules for playing. 

pfattkatt wrote:  generally, at my level, the openings only follow "the book" to the 5th or 6 th move, and after that, i'm on my own anyway. 

---

You are allow to use books, However what good is there in using them during your games? If you are hit with an opening that you are unfamiliar with don't run to a book or magazine, database just play it out and  see how well you do. You will learn more coming across something you never seen before than following a book. Besides you opponent will probabily play out of book or chose a different move order then you have to use the left side of you brain :) I think the victory is sweeter if you tuff it out. and if you don't win oh well atleast you gave it your all. then go look up that DAMN opening hahaha.

Where is the Circle of Trust group that was mentioned earlier?

matzleeach, you know i owe u an enormous debt in helping me improve my game. i find that the memorization in a vacuum dificult. as i play, or replay a game with a book accompanying it, it is more "alive." if the game i am studying from is annotated, i may gain some understanding of what i am trying to get to for the middle game. so i find it helpful.i was, frankly, aware of the "rule," i was curious what public opinion might be.

wow this is interesting