It's time to nail this problem down - people usin

Computer assistance -

Originally, RHP agreed that people could use computers to access a database. However, what has happened is that some players are not only using a computer to access a database of the opening moves, they're also using the computer to suggest a move from any given position!

Russ agrees with me that RHP does NOT allow computer suggested moves. So we need to talk about this. Can people continue to use a computer database for the opening moves? Keep in mind that most games are won or lost out of the opening! But on the other hand, isn't a computer database just the same thing as a book library!?... And this is why we have so many misinterpretations here at our favorite site.

I have a solution, and I would like the membership's support if you agree with it. Here is what I propose we do at RHP:

1) A computer database may be used as long as the party who uses it states in his profile that he uses a computer database.

2) A computer may NOT be used to suggest a move from any actual position of play after the opening moves. In other words, even though your game might contain the same moves from an opening database, once a diversion from that order is seen, the computer user MAY NOT ask the computer for a suggested move!

Please help strengthen the laws here at RHP so that we can all continue to have a good time playing HUMAN opponents.

Best regards,
Don Vandivier,
Former editor of Michigan Chess
Freelance chess writer for Chess Life
and former computer buster for the ICC

I like the idea of stating in the profile that a database or books may be used by the player, but I would not favor restricting computer use beyond banning use of a chess engine to calculate moves.

Or perhaps marking individual games as "database" games. I personally use a database for about 2% of my games as a tool to learn new openings. I wouldn't have a problem not using it in most of my games, by choice, but I would like to retain that choice.

If my opponent were to object, of course, I would desist. After all, it is a friendly game.

On another topic, what is a good way to tell if your oppenent has been using a chess engine against you? The only thing I can think of is running it through Fritz after the game's over and compare the moves...

--Al

It always comes down to the same basic problems with this.

How do you know if someone is running a chess program against you, and how do you PROVE it?

If you have played numerous games against one person and they play at a consistent level, then all of a sudden they start making seriously better moves, I suppose you could suspect them of using an engine or getting outside help, but proving it might be a little hard.

just my thoughts,
Marc

I agree that it is bad form to use a computer as an aid. Just as it is bad form to ask someone else to look at a board and suggest moves, or to even consult a book in the middle of a game. However, the person who doe so hurts themselves most of all.

Originally posted by arrakis
Computer assistance -

Originally, RHP agreed that people could use computers to access a database. However, what has happened is that some players are not only using a computer to access a database of the opening moves, they're also using the computer to suggest a move from any given position!

Russ agrees with me that RHP does NOT allow computer sugg ...[text shortened]... Chess
Freelance chess writer for Chess Life
and former computer buster for the ICC

I am trying to establish a condition where computer use is accepted for reference, but not accepted for general play.

I believe in using computers for databases and openings, but what I don't believe in is playing an opponent who uses a computer for the sake of "suggesting moves". It's like going to a tournament and having a grandmaster watching over your game, suggesting what you should or should not play... What kind of game is that? When I play a person here, I expect it to be a real person with real thought about the game - I don't want to play his/her darn computer!

arrakis

Originally posted by arrakis
I am trying to establish a condition where computer use is accepted for reference, but not accepted for general play.

I believe in using computers for databases and openings, but what I don't believe in is playing an opponent who uses a computer for the sake of "suggesting moves". It's like going to a tournament and having a grandmaster watching ov ...[text shortened]... on with real thought about the game - I don't want to play his/her darn computer!

arrakis

Originally posted by Cheshire Cat
It appears that you think you have been playing someone's computer. May I ask who and what game...you should send that as a PM. Perhaps you just think that they are; perhaps they are really getting better?

~ Cheshire Cat 😀

Computer databases ARE equivalent to Opening-books. Therefore if you have to state that you use a computer database, you'd also have to state you're using a book.

But what use is it? A more skilled player is exactly that because he knows more situations, and knows how to answer those situations better. THAT INCLUDES MOVES IN THE OPENING. Why should we allow weaker players to take away that natural difference by allowing them to look up openings at all?

I find it unfair to skilled players who see their advantage being lost because everyone is allowed to use a database.

My vote is to stop it all together, although that'll be hard to accomplish.

Originally posted by Essex AP
I agree that it is bad form to use a computer as an aid. Just as it is bad form to ask someone else to look at a board and suggest moves, or to even consult a book in the middle of a game. However, the person who doe so hurts themselves most of all.

Originally posted by TheMaster37
Computer databases ARE equivalent to Opening-books. Therefore if you have to state that you use a computer database, you'd also have to state you're using a book.

But what use is it? A more skilled player is exactly that because he knows more situations, and knows how to answer those situations better. THAT INCLUDES MOVES IN THE OPENING. Why should ...[text shortened]... use a database.

My vote is to stop it all together, although that'll be hard to accomplish.

I joined RHP to play chess with people, not computers.
When I'm here, I expect to face not just intelligent chess, but creative and emotional chess.
As an impulsive player myself, I tend to seek a similar type of player.
Computer-suggested moves may be clever, but they cannot be creative.
I have no problem with people consulting books or databases, but I consider computer-suggested moves to be not so much cheating, as defeating the whole point of playing correspondence chess with a real person.
Not the most clearly put argument, I agree, but I think my point is obvious.

Originally posted by mwmiller
It always comes down to the same basic problems with this.

How do you know if someone is running a chess program against you, and how do you PROVE it?

If you have played numerous games against one person and they play at a consistent level, then all of a sudden they start making seriously better moves, I suppose you could suspect them of using an engine or getting outside help, but proving it might be a little hard.

just my thoughts,
Marc

Are you auditioning for Glenngarry Glennross?

Originally posted by Exy
Are you auditioning for Glenngarry Glennross?