- Joined
- 05 Aug 04
- Moves
- 243565
Originally posted by marinakatombA silly suggestion I know but why not just play chess yourself?
Recently i have downloaded 4 rather large databases of games from ICCF. Now, i haven't used any of these yet as I am aware that there are different rules on ICCF regarding engines. As Engine use is permitted in this federation, it stands to reason that a lot of the games would match up with Engines pretty well. Am i allowed to use this source of information or not?
🙄
- Joined
- 05 Aug 04
- Moves
- 243565
Originally posted by The Slow PawnHeavens above. Are you allowed to do that!!!! Rely on your own skills!!! Shocking suggestion.
Plus there comes the time in every game where the position is going to be unique and then you'll still have to rely on your own skills ...
Regards
Boris
I find the whole database thing a bit of a turnoff. I can understand people wanting to use book openings. I do so myself but why would you want to refer to a database after the initial opening?
The whole point of chess is to engage YOUR brain not someone elses or as it seems someone elses engine.
You could in theory play a whole game from a database. Therefore you are simply deciding which of the recommended moves you use. Bit like an engine really.
And yes I have seen the other threads about databases and I'm sorry, I just think it's wrong. I'm sure some will agree with me and others will disagree.
It's not against the rules of the site but IMHO it should be.
Originally posted by Grandmaster baterHey, i would be happy not to use a database, if that mean't no one used one against me. However, almost all 1700+ players use books or databases, so i run the risk of being beaten by statistics all the time. I rarely use it (i play unpopular lines which aren't common place in most peoples bases). More often than not, i am checking that the move i want to play has been played before and how well it scores...
Heavens above. Are you allowed to do that!!!! Rely on your own skills!!! Shocking suggestion.
I find the whole database thing a bit of a turnoff. I can understand people wanting to use book openings. I do so myself but why would you want to refer to a database after the initial opening?
The whole point of chess is to engage YOUR brain n ...[text shortened]... e and others will disagree.
It's not against the rules of the site but IMHO it should be.
3 edits
Originally posted by marinakatombThis topic comes up often. Usually in conjunction with end-game tablebases. The last time was in this thread. Thread 40977 I'll repost some of the relevant sections again...
Recently i have downloaded 4 rather large databases of games from ICCF. Now, i haven't used any of these yet as I am aware that there are different rules on ICCF regarding engines. As Engine use is permitted in this federation, it stands to reason that a lot of the games would match up with Engines pretty well. Am i allowed to use this source of information or not?
We did post the following clarification awhile back:
A clarification of Section 3(b) of the Terms of Service
It is extremely unlikely that a database, no matter how large, would be consulted thoughout a game of reasonable length by both players. However, if a past game was substantially followed, and was orginally played by one or more computers/engines, it could be considered as evidence of engine use. The onus, therefore, is on each player to avoid relying on such games in their databases. The prior existence of engine games would not be considered a defence against engine use.
A database, for the purposes of the Terms of Service, should consist of previously played games only. An endgame tablebase, i.e. Namilov, is not a database under this definition. Using an endgame tablebase to assist you in a game is cheating and a violation of section 3(b).
- The Game Mod Team
A database consists of a collection of previously played games. If you find a perfect match for a position beyond the opening phase, and with more than a handful of pieces left on the board, you are really pushing back the boundaries of statistical improbability. And even if you do find a match, there is no guarantee that the game was played perfectly.
Dr Scribbles: I would also like to see a third category addressed. Suppose I have a database of games from engine vs. engine competitions in which those engines were allowed the use of tablebases. May I consult my database of those games once I have reached a point that I know both engines are using their tablebases?
Okay, so you, a human, are playing a game of chess against another human, and you both follow a past engine vs engine database game, move-for-move, right the way through to a 3 to 6 piece endgame where the outcome is now completely known....
Really? Why the would two people in their right minds do that? Why not just agree on the result upfront? Why even bother playing chess at all?
If so, what makes this permissible? The fact that those moves reside in a game database?
Yes. However, given that you are playing chess on a site where engine use is forbidden, you take a risk by doing this. Relying on engine vs engine games substantially beyond the opening phases could get you into trouble if your games are ever analyzed for engine use.
And why would you want to rely on past engine-vs-engine games anyway?
Play your own game. Learn. Enjoy. That's why we are all here.
From what I can gather the database you want to use is perfectly legal. However, because it contains engine-vs-engine games, you take a risk using it much beyond the established opining lines. Of course, the likelyhood that you could use it beyond the opening lines is extremely remote. But the onus is on you to avoid over-reliance on past engine-vs-engine games, not because they are illegal per se, but because they might adversely influence any future investigation into your games.
When games are anlysed for engine use, established opening lines are ignored. It is during this phase that books and databases can help you most, including the database you describe.
Beyond that point you should be on your own, and playing your own game.
Originally posted by GatecrasherThis is what i was looking for, sort of. My main concern is that i might pick a game out of the database which is an engine v engine, while being unaware that the game was being played between two engines (as i'm sure ICCF must be rife with engine users...).
When games are anlysed for engine use, established opening lines are ignored. It is during this phase that books and databases can help you most, including the database you describe.
Beyond that point you should be on your own, and playing your own game.
It is unlikely i will relly on this database too much anyway, but i just wanted to get a clear picture of what i can and can't do. I'm sure you take my point though, this database is full of games played by people at home, not GM's in tournament conditions, so there is room for engine analysis to slip into a players game through their database without their knowledge of it happening...
- Joined
- 05 Aug 04
- Moves
- 243565
Originally posted by GatecrasherThe last line is my point exactly. It seems that some players may be using databases beyond opening lines and are moving into the midgame and even end game.
When games are anlysed for engine use, established opening lines are ignored. It is during this phase that books and databases can help you most, including the database you describe.
Beyond that point you should be on your own, and playing your own game.
This to my mind makes the whole point of playing worthless as it's not the player making the move(s) but a move from some game previously played by a player (or engine) unknown.
Originally posted by Grandmaster baterThe only way you are going to get into the late middle, or endgame with any database filled with engine moves is... if... the other guy is using the same database, or... an engine.
The last line is my point exactly. It seems that some players may be using databases beyond opening lines and are moving into the midgame and even end game.
This to my mind makes the whole point of playing worthless as it's not the player making the move(s) but a move from some game previously played by a player (or engine) unknown.
Chances are you will never get into late middle or endgame with data because one of the players is going to either make a new move not being happy with a draw or lost game. People need to remember that there are millions of different choices for lines in the next 10 or so moves of a chess game. I think people are too worried about this subject.
If a player ends up matching chess engines in most of his games, and blames it on a large database... frankly, they are full of it. If you are not using an engine, there is nothing to worry about even using these databases. There are just far too many choices in a chess game to stick to data in all your games.
P-
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveNope. You would struggle to use this site at all without *any* computer assistance though.
Why?
Is it now compulsory to use databases?
Where are these other sites that people keep telling non-users to eff off to? And do they permit chess to be played person to person?
1 edit
Given the strength of engines, how could anybody be rated below Master unless he's a new guy that hasn't got there yet? If that's the case, play your best against his engine, when the time comes resign, then forget about it and move on. I know it'll cost a few rating points, but REALLY, other than yourself, how many people care about how many RHP rating points you have? Of all the games I've ever played, exactly 4 have seen the light of day...one published in a national mag and three are on one of those big databases, but I doubt anybody will ever pick them out of 2 million other games. Nobody has ever asked to see any of my games, and the last time I was asked what my rating was, was 15 years ago at an OTB tmt. My point....don't worry about it at this level. If you ever get to play the big boys for the world championship (net or correspondence) they all use engines anyway……
Edit:
OK I'm ready to get trashed for the above comments...come on, let me have it!