Originally posted by no1marauderOf course. And if you play OTB and help your visualization by looking at the board, you are also allowed to play at a level you really haven't reached. I think only blindfold blitz games, or games you play as if they were blindfold blitz games, show your real level.
What does that last sentence mean exactly?? There's essentially unlimited time in CC whereas time is an important factor in OTB play. By taking more time than you would be allowed to in OTB play, are you being "allowed to play at a level you really haven't reached?" You're not allowed to play through variations on a side board or an analysis board in OTB ...[text shortened]... t you are in CC. Are you being "allowed to play at a level you really haven't reached"?
Originally posted by NordlysI think after a while I would be unable to make a legal move in blindfolded blitz, does this mean I can't play chess?
Of course. And if you play OTB and help your visualization by looking at the board, you are also allowed to play at a level you really haven't reached. I think only blindfold blitz games, or games you play as if they were blindfold blitz games, show your real level.
- Joined
- 05 Aug 04
- Moves
- 243576
Originally posted by Vladamir no1Interesting question. However, as has been stated it's not against the rules to use databases. So we can't really complain if people do so.
I think so, it is an unfair advantage that with a good database can take you well into the middle game, unlike books which aren't too unfair..... Thoughts ?
This is not OTB chess it's correspondant chess on the internet.
Personally I do not use databases but I will look up information on openings/variations.
I started doing so about 6 months ago after a number of embarrassing defeats early on in some of my games V players rated 1600ish who I knew were using databases. It said so on the packet!!!
Once past the opening sequences it then becomes all my own work!! 😕
I have found that the more I play standard openings the easier it becomes to remember them.
I started with black responses but I'm now playing with white openings having fixed on a slight variation on a standard opening for white. This worked OK but again was/is occasionally taken apart by those pesky databases!!
😀
So in my case being forced into learning openings has improved my game. I would recommend that every player learns openings and the responses. It improves your game and leads to more games getting past the first 7 moves!! 😳
Originally posted by no1marauder1) I use a board on the side. I try out different variations to figure out what will work best. And then I choose that one. (I am helped by what I can recall from reading books, studying previous games and databases, and my personal experience.)
What does that last sentence mean exactly?? There's essentially unlimited time in CC whereas time is an important factor in OTB play. By taking more time than you would be allowed to in OTB play, are you being "allowed to play at a level you really haven't reached?" You're not allowed to play through variations on a side board or an analysis board in OTB ...[text shortened]... ere's plenty of places on the net to play timed chess that don't allow databases.
2) I lookup known-to-work-well-by-other-players variations in a book or database and use the one that I think will work best.
Are you telling me, that in both accounts you, the person playing chess, are doing all of the thinking?
If the database (compiled on knowledge collected from other players) really didn't do much for your game, why use it at all?
---
No, I'm not disputing the rules of CC as they are written such for a good reason. How the hell am I supposed to know if you're cheating were databases not allowed? So, I have no problem with databases (even when used during the game). I have a problem with those who claim that there's a huge difference between databases and chess engines. It's a difference, but it's not huge. A good enough collection of lines and you can play on a level much higher than you in reality have reached. A chess engine does the same for you. Both can be considered ways of improving your games. Both can be used to win games without understanding zip of what's going on.
That's all I'm saying.
Originally posted by stockenYou are wrong. A good player uses a database differently from what you are saying; he doesn't merely parrot moves because Grandmaster X played it. This has been explained to you many times. I'm sick to death of this stupid argument; a database is a useful tool for learning openings, an engine is just plain cheating.
1) I use a board on the side. I try out different variations to figure out what will work best. And then I choose that one. (I am helped by what I can recall from reading books, studying previous games and databases, and my personal experience.)
2) I lookup known-to-work-well-by-other-players variations in a book or database and use the one that I think w ...[text shortened]... d to win games without understanding zip of what's going on.
That's all I'm saying.
Originally posted by stockenIf you have memorized an opening, you aren't doing much thinking either, do you? Does that mean you are playing above your "real level" if you play a memorized opening instead of coming up with your own moves?
1) I use a board on the side. I try out different variations to figure out what will work best. And then I choose that one. (I am helped by what I can recall from reading books, studying previous games and databases, and my personal experience.)
2) I lookup known-to-work-well-by-other-players variations in a book or database and use the one that I think w ...[text shortened]... telling me, that in both accounts you, the person playing chess, are doing all of the thinking?
If the database (compiled on knowledge collected from other players) really didn't do much for your game, why use it at all?
Who says it doesn't do much for your game?
If you are playing at a certain level in CC, and you follow the rules of CC, then that's your real CC level. Your CC level may be quite different from your OTB level, which again may be quite different from your blitz level. That doesn't mean only one of them is "real".
Originally posted by no1marauderIt has been explained to me many times? I'm sorry, but I have no recollection of this. Perhaps this is a discussion that has been debated where somehow you think I was involved?
You are wrong. A good player uses a database differently from what you are saying; he doesn't merely parrot moves because Grandmaster X played it. This has been explained to you many times. I'm sick to death of this stupid argument; a database is a useful tool for learning openings, an engine is just plain cheating.
I'm saying that a less than good player could use the database to mimic grandmaster X and manage to win games against players (s)he otherwise wouldn't have. I'm saying a good player can use an engine to get suggestions yet figure out what's happening and decide based on that. I'm saying that both an engine and a database is a tool that will allow you to play beyond you're actual skill. If you don't see it that way, I have nothing more to say. I know databases are allowed and engines are not, so I won't whine about it. See? I'm not whining, although this bloody discussion makes it look like I'm whining.
Oh, I'll just shut up then. It's clear that I either aren't getting my message through or you people just don't agree with me. No big deal really.
Originally posted by wormwoodI agree with this.
well, after I started using db, there was no effect in my rating. but my games are far better than before. no more homemade ad hoc openings, no more engraving the wrong patterns into your brain.
...
why waste your time with homemade openings when you can learn to do it properly?
Originally posted by stockenwell then, how do you explain that my first 50 games here (non-database) are exactly the same rating as games 50-90 using database? if I used an engine, I would've rocketed to 2000+ during games 50-90.
...I have a problem with those who claim that there's a huge difference between databases and chess engines. It's a difference, but it's not huge. A good enough collection of lines and you can play on a level much higher than you in reality have reached. ...
the claim that engine vs. databases give similar advantage is ridiculous. just try it, and you'll see why. -it doesn't save you from thinking about your position, it teaches you to play better chess. or at least gives you the possibility.
before using db, I couldn't see where my opponents diversed from book lines, not without further checking. now I see almost instantly when some move leaves book. it just doesn't look right. running through hundreds of db-lines has developed my intuitive feel for positions. I'm starting to feel where I should go, what kind of structures I should aim for.
before, I often wondered why my games looked like they did. and why games of good players looked very different. my positions just collapsed early on, and there was no complicate piece-shuffling, cohesion or harmony. now I understand why, and most of my games are a lot more enjoyable.
Originally posted by NordlysShouldn't it be: "You aren't doing much thinking either, are you"?
If you have memorized an opening, you aren't doing much thinking either, do you? Does that mean you are playing above your "real level" if you play a memorized opening instead of coming up with your own moves?
[b]If the database (compiled on knowledge collected from other players) really didn't do much for your game, why use it at all?
Who says it ...[text shortened]... be quite different from your blitz level. That doesn't mean only one of them is "real".[/b]
Oh, well. You do have a point there. But then again, if memorizing openings and variations and using them like a robotic without understanding is the same as actually using books and databases without really understanding them (and I'm not saying that goes for everyone), what's the difference between that and using an engine? In all the cases above the only real difference is that the engine will take you all the way to the end of the game. Is that like saying: using help part of the game is OK, but not the entire game?
Also, if databases and books written by more experienced players are ok during CC games, why aren't you allowed to consult a more experienced player directly? It's the same thing. The consultant will tell you a few possible variations, explain their pros and cons for each and you decide.
Honestly, all I want to get at, is that using databases and books is an aid that will allow you to think of moves that you otherwise wouldn't have. You yourself says: "Who says it doesn't do much for your game". Exactly! That's my point. Whether it's right or wrong, part of the rules or not and whether those rules can be questioned or not is besides my point.
The whole discussion began in that other thread where I stated that engines and databases aren't all that different. I didn't say anything about right or wrong or the rules of CC. As long as you can agree with me that they aren't all that different, I have no problem with any of this.