Is using a computer to help you with your moves cheating?(like going to a website)
Sort:
Using a chess database is not cheating. Using a computer to analyize a position and come up with a move is cheating.
it's very unethical and cowardly. Don't ever do it.
its cheating, because if the game has been played out like theirs then it is like seeing thier moves before they make them.
It's no different than using a dictionary prior to making a move in Scrabble. It's cheating.
An interesting question, but not easily answered. To use a computer to annylize past games to improve your own play is fine. However, if you go looking for a past game that is following the same line as the one you are currently in with the plan to duplicate the moves in your current game, then that is cheating and must not be done. I'll go and review past games studying why certain moves were made with the thought of incorporating those moves into a future game. It is how we all improve. But copyng moves from a past game in your present game doesn't teach you anything. If you want to be a better chess player, don't do it.
I think people should be allowed use an engine to help them improve BUT! under conditions that the game is not rated and the opponent knows that they are playing someone using an engine. Special 'learning' games like these should be allowed but strictly for learning as it would help people get better. The part that ruins this idea is people playing rated games using engines. Non rated and full information about the conditions being played by both players and i would be for the idea.
Mar 4, 2008
0
#8
add wrote: its cheating, because if the game has been played out like theirs then it is like seeing thier moves before they make them.
The first thing that needs to be said is that, whatever you may think of the practice, it is not cheating because it is explicitly allowed within the rules. This is, after all, a form of correspondance chess and the practice of using databases goes back to the days when moves were written out on postcards and were delivered along with your bills for heating coal delivery. That databases are now computerised is a great convenience, as is sending moves via the internet, but in essence nothing has changed.
Second, the notion that this is anything like "seeing their moves before they make them" is of course downright silly. Just because the position in your game occurred in the 1954 Leningrad City Chess Championship doesn't mean your game will proceed down the same lines now. Yes, you might surmise that whatever move Nikolai Kopilov chose then was probably pretty good, but it won't tell you why, what traps might exist, what risks he was taking on etc. The real value of using databases is to give you a feel for your opening choices- does playing the exchange variation lead to the kind of game you're comfortable with or maybe the advance variation suits you more. It's a fantastic way to try out openings or variations you might not be familiar with without the fear of getting trounced until you get the hang of things. Also, the need to study opening theory in order to play chess at a high level these days is one of the scourges of modern chess. (How many players take up the game because of a fondness for rote memorization?) Proposals like Fischerandom Chess seek to circumvent this problem but the solution has always existed in correspondance chess naturally enough- why look at it as a bad thing? Databases are easy enough to come by- you can look them up online for free- so it's not like anyone is put at a disadvantage.
Of course the idea of using databases may not sit well with certain individuals, in which case I'd suggest that this style of chess is not for them. The use of databases (electronic or printed) is a longstanding aspect of the game when it's played by correspondance. To suggest that there's something wrong with it is as baseless and arbitrary as the claim that castling or capturing en passant is cheating. Your oponents are doing it so either accept it or play real-time.
That just about sums it up, skorj.
Using information from websites to help learn your openings is the same as reading "Modern Chess Openings" to help learn your openings. If we outlaw the use of databases, then we need to outlaw the use of chess books. And how many chess books have been written? A whole lot. And they are there for the same purpose as the computer databases: to help you learn about chess. If you get rid of one, or call one cheating, you have to call the other one cheating. The advantage of the computer database is that it collates information from many books and other sources into an easily usable format. So all we've done is improved our technology.
While I appreciate everyone's view, I would just ask that you not use a computer while playing me. It's tough enough beating just a human opponent!
Mar 5, 2008
0
#12
punk64 wrote: While I appreciate everyone's view, I would just ask that you not use a computer while playing me. It's tough enough beating just a human opponent!
If your opponent is using a database then your opponent is human. A database is not the same as an engine such as Fritz or Rybka.
its cheating!
it's generally accepted that going to databases and opening books (or book openings posted on the web) is not cheating..., but the database use seems like cheating because it can get in the way of developing your game. Databases are useful for learning about chess history though.
i don't use databases for positions, with the exception of occasionally during VOTECHESS. But, i try to stay Book on openings to learn Book.
i dont think i would be but if you use somyhing to analyze your moves four you it is
I think it's okay, for the most part. Many people read books in order to improve their game. So what's wrong with it in electronic form? Obviously, if everyone here is able to access the internet to play chess online then they're also all able to access help sites. As long as nothing but yourself is analyzing your game (i.e. computer program or outside human help), then there's not really anything wrong with it.
On the other hand, if you have a self-imposed hindrance of not reading books or accessing online databases, you can't really complain. You're doing it to yourself.
I think it's cheating. You can analyze the game afterwards if you wish, but your opponent wants to play you, not a computer. What are you really gaining that couldn't be gained rightfully by going back to the game later? Not much but an false score.
An easy way to get around this problem would be to ask at the beginning of a game if your opponent minds if you reference a database. If they prefer not, abide by there wishes or abort. If they have no problem with it. Great, game on!
Mar 5, 2008
0
#20
Even if a game starts out with the same pattern as another previously played game, it's not likely to continue in that pattern. I've tried to look at my own games in which I've played well and try to duplicate a few good moves, but it never works and it takes too much time to keep going back anyway. It's probably easier and will improve your game more if you try to think critically instead of trying to memorize some other games.
I find it amazing that anyone would even have the time to do that.
Some people will go to websites and go to games that have been played out the same way and use it to help them with their moves. I could see using books but the computer. There are thousands of games that have been played that are on the internet and the person using the websites to help them with moves has a huge advantage over their opponent. Is this cheating or is it just taking advantage of computers?