Originally posted by martin williamsNow we're on a different subject altogether. Using computer-suggested moves is outright cheating. Any kind of process where a computer evaluates a position and suggests a move, it is considered cheating. Computer databases are fine because there's no evaluation involved; all your getting is what moves were played, but with no explanation why.
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 databas ...[text shortened]... ith a real person.
Not the most clearly put argument, I agree, but I think my point is obvious.
There's a clear difference between "database" and "engine." One lists the moves that others have made in a position. The other comes up with a move based on its evaluation of the tactical and positional aspects of the position. One is ok, one isn't.
It's not that hard. Really!
Fritz is an engine.
Chessgames.com is not.
Shredder is an engine.
Chessbase is not.
c'mon people.
Originally posted by paultopiaIt's still a crutch, however one looks at it...in my opinion
There's a clear difference between "database" and "engine." One lists the moves that others have made in a position. The other comes up with a move based on its evaluation of the tactical and positional aspects of the position. One is ok, one isn't.
It's not that hard. Really!
Fritz is an engine.
Chessgames.com is not.
Shredder is an engine.
Chessbase is not.
c'mon people.
3 edits
Originally posted by chancremechanicSure, but on correspondence chess, some crutches are generally considered acceptable. Lists of prior moves, in whatever form, are an acceptable crutch in cc. On the other hand, substituting someone else's tactical and positional judgment of the consequences of the various moves you are considering, or getitng the judgement of someone else on your game, is not, whether that judgment comes from fritz or the friendly grandmaster looking over your shoulder. I say again, how hard is it?
It's still a crutch, however one looks at it...in my opinion
It's like taking an open-book test: you're allowed to look in the book, but you aren't allowed to ask the guy next to you.
Actually, this is remarkably reminiscent of the practice at many law schools to give 8 hour long take-home tests. I took many of those tests at HLS. In such a test, you are allowed to use any non-living source you can get: your book, your notes, some commercially prepared outline -- it's perfectly acceptable to go to the bookstore mid-test and buy a book that has the information you want. You can even have exam answers from prior years, if the professor is stupid enough to repeat the exams.
On the other hand, you can not knock on the door next to you and ask for help, or for that matter e-mail a friend and ask them, mid-test, to send you their outline. You're free to do this BEFORE the test starts, but not after.
The distinction is manifestly clear.
How sad is it that people use a prog and raise their rating. Does that make them feel good about themselves, do you think?
I imagine most people have cheated at some point in their lives. Does it feel good to have that false victory? No.
I think most really good chess players can recognize a prog. Many of them have progs with which to hone their own skills, and they can run the prog along with their games with the cheater. That will prove that the person is cheating.
How obvious is it that I don't cheat? 😀
Originally posted by elvendreamgirlvery obvious ;-)
How sad is it that people use a prog and raise their rating. Does that make them feel good about themselves, do you think?
I imagine most people have cheated at some point in their lives. Does it feel good to have that false victory? No.
I think most really good chess players can recognize a prog. Many of them have progs with which to hone their ow ...[text shortened]... heater. That will prove that the person is cheating.
How obvious is it that I don't cheat? 😀
And I have cheated loads in my life ...
All those stupied ex-girlfriends of mine I cheated sooner or later (and they probably on me)... lol ... monogamie is for boring people !!!
this is a topic that comes up a lot - the bottom line seems to be that we have to rely on the honour of players here at RHP when it comes to computer use - it's generally to hard to detect and enforce and perhaps impossible to prove conclusively, especially if just done sporadically or in 'difficult' positions...
Originally posted by The Slow PawnI have found the same thing. rhp is much more like correspondence chess than otb chess. a game can last several weeks... and we constantly have games going on. during the course of the games we obviously cannot be banned from reading books to improve our games.
I'd say that I in general still beat a 1200 player if he/she uses all the databases in the world, as once you are out of theory your 'better' understanding of the game will equalise any possible weaknesses very quickly ... That is why I still loose against 2000+ players ... Even if (which is extremely hard at that level) you manage to get a slight a ...[text shortened]... le attacks of yourself ... So my vote is yes to databases and NO to engines (obviously)
Boris
for example, if i am trying to learn the king's gambit, i'll do some reading on it, play over a few gm games, and start some games on rhp. since i am still learning the opening, i will read my book from time to time, or go over other gm games... all of this while i have games going on.
i think where the problem comes in is that computer databases are highly efficient books. so rather than just a dozen main lines, you can find every gm move in every situation and run statistics on it. while this is not the same as using an analysis engine, i can see how it might be bothersome. my mco runs out after about move 12... but chessbase keeps going until someone plays a "new" move.
i could support some kind of limitation such as databases/opening books allowed until move X (although this is iffy, because some openings reach the middlegame much sooner than others), or perhaps limiting the funcionality we can use with databases (but i am not sure how that would work). either way, it would be up to the users to police themselves and adhere to the rules.
to those who are offended by the use of databases... if it weren't allowed by rhp, i wouldn't use them. the people who would continue to use them are probably using chess engines as well. if you are worried about your rating, remember that your rating is a relative measure of how well you perform on a site that allows certain study aids. if you choose not to use those study aids, that is up to you, but your rating will probably be lower. what this obviously means is that if you have two players with equal "ratings", that does not imply they have equal "ability".
icc bans all computer use. rightly so. icc is played at otb pace. even the "slow" games are efforts of concentration and calculation. it is good to have that, to prepare for tournament play.
but i think it is also good to have a place where we can enjoy casual chess, try new ideas, and learn as we go. at least that has been my rhp experience. but i am a relative newcomer.
has anybody thought about restricting database and opening book use to unrated games?