Ok, so i have completed 400 odd games on this site. Now, if i created a database of my past games, but i analysed them all using fritz to correct errors, would that count as cheating? Technically speaking, it is the engine that has improved on the moves played, but the suggestions it makes only apply to mistakes you have made in the past. I haven't done this yet, it's just that i intend to create a database of my past games and am wondering if i can use Fritz to analyse them. Obviously if i was to use this database during play, my opening play would improve a lot over night, the last thing i want is to get banned. I'm sure i'm not the only player here who has thought of this, how would the mod team know you were not just using an engine? I seem to remember Gatecrasher stating that opening moves are excluded when the mods do analysis. A little clarification of the rules would be appreciated.
Cheers
James~>
Originally posted by marinakatombShouldn't be cheating as it isn't analysing a game in progress to give you the next move.
Ok, so i have completed 400 odd games on this site. Now, if i created a database of my past games, but i analysed them all using fritz to correct errors, would that count as cheating? Technically speaking, it is the engine that has improved on the moves played, but the suggestions it makes only apply to mistakes you have made in the past. I haven't don ...[text shortened]... e mods do analysis. A little clarification of the rules would be appreciated.
Cheers
James~>
Good point though, would the current methods of detecting cheaters get round this?
EDIT: Thinking about it, 400 games wouldn't be all that many lines of play. Even if you were to add other lines generated from fritz on the database. Future games would still stray from your database rather quickly. I am presuming mods would take into consideration moves made much later in the game as well.
Originally posted by marinakatombDef. not cheating ...
Ok, so i have completed 400 odd games on this site. Now, if i created a database of my past games, but i analysed them all using fritz to correct errors, would that count as cheating? Technically speaking, it is the engine that has improved on the moves played, but the suggestions it makes only apply to mistakes you have made in the past. I haven't don ...[text shortened]... e mods do analysis. A little clarification of the rules would be appreciated.
Cheers
James~>
Your database (with due respect) would still be extremely poorly compared to what (e.g.) Fritz's database had to offer ...
And since using that database (for your openings) is legal yours is as well
Boris
Originally posted by lauseyYes but they are all using the same openings (200 as white, 200 as black..) That would eek out a lot of errors from my openings and replace them with Computer preferred moves. The resulting middle game positions would then have a higher match up to an engine as i would most probably find a similar plan to that which the engine prefers. I recon i would end up matching up some 10% more if i used this method, which would obviously look very suspicious.
Shouldn't be cheating as it isn't analysing a game in progress to give you the next move.
Good point though, would the current methods of detecting cheaters get round this?
EDIT: Thinking about it, 400 games wouldn't be all that many lines of play. Even if you were to add other lines generated from fritz on the database. Future games would still stra ...[text shortened]... ly. I am presuming mods would take into consideration moves made much later in the game as well.
This also came up here:
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=29545&page=12
I seriously doubt that ANY 400 game database will be much use to you after a few moves. After all, it does rely on your opponents' also following your past games. Established opening lines are generally excluded from game mod analysis anyway (and this is sure to include almost all your engine choices in the opening phase), so I think the number of moves that might be influenced, should your games ever be analysed, is minimal. Can your database bring you 10% closer to an engine? No way.
Besides the first time you veer off in the direction suggested by your engine, won't you have left your database already behind already?
Any preparation you do prior to playing a game is legitimate. That includes using an engine to analyze past games. Once a game is in progress, you are limited to books and any pre-existing databases you might have. Any annotations you may have made in your database (ie what an engine suggests) is fine too.
Although I have a 4 million game database, I can seldom use it beyond 10 moves or so, so I seriously doubt that your 400 games is going to put you in any kind of danger.
Originally posted by GatecrasherGC, as black i play this...
This also came up here:
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=29545&page=12
I seriously doubt that [b]ANY 400 game database will be much use to you after a few moves. After all, it does rely on your opponents' also following your past games. Established opening lines are generally excluded from game mod analysis anyway (and t ...[text shortened]... moves or so, so I seriously doubt that your 400 games is going to put you in any kind of danger.[/b]
eg..
1.e4 ..d6
2.d4 ..c6
3.c4 ..e5
This works against 1.e4, 1.d4, 1.c4 and with a slightly different move order...1.Nf3 1.b4 1.Nc3, etc...
The middle game positions that i achieve in my games are all very similar, regardless of what white wants to play. The offer of a Queen exchange is either taken or declined, which gives two clear branches of opening lines in ALL of my black games. If i was to use an engine to analyse past losses/wins to find improvements, i feel that i would quickly end up in a situation where the middle game plan arising from my 'one stop' defense to everything, would largely match the recommendations from my engine. As i said before, obviously i'll loose out through a poor end game technique, but a lot of games would be won through prior computer analysis in the early middle game. How would i protect myself from accusations in this circumstance?
Originally posted by GatecrasherBut if your DB is big enough, couldn't someone then build up enough engine produced annotation to actually constitute cheating?
Preparation. Note the past tense, ie, provided it is done before the game!
Remember, I don't use DBs, books etc., so bear with me... I have no real theoretical chess knowledge.
Originally posted by CrowleyThat would still be only a few small drops in the vast oceans of possible game permutations. And the time it would take to analyze and annotate say a four million game database, at a minute a move? Over 600 years.
But if your DB is big enough, couldn't someone then build up enough engine produced annotation to actually constitute cheating?
Remember, I don't use DBs, books etc., so bear with me... I have no real theoretical chess knowledge.
Originally posted by marinakatomb"Similar" is not good enough for an engine to replicate its calculations. That's one thing that separates engines from humans, humans recognise "patterns" and "similarities" through learning, whereas engines employ brute force calculation to work with exact positions. Just because a position is similiar does not mean an engine will pop up with the same answer. If you are going to blindly use engine suggestions to play game that are only "similar" you might be in for a few nasty surprises. Much better to understand why the engine made its original recomendation, and then apply what you've learnt in future games.
The middle game positions that i achieve in my games are all very similar, regardless of what white wants to play.
Originally posted by GatecrasherDoes this mean one can't analyse a finished game if you are playing another game with the same line?
Any preparation you do prior to playing a game is legitimate. That includes using an engine to analyze past games. Once a game is in progress, you are limited to books and any pre-existing databases you might have. Any annotations you may have made in your database (ie what an engine suggests) is fine too.
Suppose I have 2 games, Game A and game B. Game A is finished in a few days. Game B is following the exact same line, but takes a lot longer to finish. Can I in the maintime analyse game A to see where I have gone wrong? Although the chance that this occurs is very small, I'm not going to wait, say 3 months, to analyse a game.
Originally posted by schakuhrI suppose technically you can analyse game A because it still is a previous game.
Does this mean one can't analyse a finished game if you are playing another game with the same line?
Suppose I have 2 games, Game A and game B. Game A is finished in a few days. Game B is following the exact same line, but takes a lot longer to finish. Can I in the maintime analyse game A to see where I have gone wrong? Although the chance that this occurs is very small, I'm not going to wait, say 3 months, to analyse a game.
Suppose it is just like the same argument that allows you to look at books and databases during a game. Nothing to stop you looking at a book that goes along the same line and read all the analysis.