11 May 08
This is an incredibly tedious thread. The fact of the matter is that the use of reference material such as opening books, endgame treatises (and more recently databases of players games) has ALWAYS been permitted in correspondence chess. This could almost be described as one of the defining features of correspondence chess. I should imagine that very few strong players would agree to play here otherwise.
Another thought for those who misguidedly seem to think there's something wrong or even immoral about using reference material:
'Real' correspondence games often used to last years, and indeed I've had games on RHP that have lasted nearly two years. Is a player in that time really expected not to consult any of his books which might contain references to opening or endgame positions that may be occurring in these games?
12 May 08
Originally posted by Northern LadJust not directly to his game imo.
This is an incredibly tedious thread. The fact of the matter is that the use of reference material such as opening books, endgame treatises (and more recently databases of players games) has ALWAYS been permitted in correspondence chess. This could almost be described as one of the defining features of correspondence chess. I should imagine that very fe ...[text shortened]... ght contain references to opening or endgame positions that may be occurring in these games?
12 May 08
Originally posted by tamuziIsn't it strage how all the players who think books should not be allowed are lowly rated (generally it seems below 1400 and in your case below 1200) whilst all those who use them are generally well above 1600 if not 1800.
Just not directly to his game imo.
So what does that tell you. (a) all the better players support the use of books and DBs and don't mind having them used against them and (b) clearly using such tools have helped them improve.
I suspect some of those who are against it don't have any books and probably can't read hence their strong dislike of such resources. This of course shows in their games.
They miss an important point (besides the fact that books are allowed) and that is that those stronger players who use books could easily beat them without reference to their books. I don't want to appear arrogant but I don't need a book to beat an 1100. When I play someone of that level I often fool around, play quickly, try things on spec, etc. because it doesn't matter if I drop a pawn or two or even a piece as I can still win. I have not lost to an 1100 player for 40 years and am not about to start doing that now, books or no books.
I suggest all of you who think books are somehow "cheating" actually buy a few and read them. You will be amased how much your chess improves.
12 May 08
Originally posted by Dragon FireIrrelevant. Dragonfire, you need to show that players with an arbitrarily high rating here are also think that using books and databases is not cheating.
Isn't it strage how all the players who think books should not be allowed are lowly rated (generally it seems below 1400 and in your case below 1200) whilst all those who use them are generally well above 1600 if not 1800.
12 May 08
Originally posted by eldragonflydude are you still on about this thing, life is too short, let it go, no one has anything to prove, unless to himself. its ancient history and it will accomplish nothing to have people dedicate their time to something that is fruitless. post something with content and relevance so that we can all benefit, honestly, for your own sake if not of others.😀
Irrelevant. Dragonfire, you need to show that players with an arbitrarily high rating here are also think that using books and databases is not cheating.
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
12 May 08
Originally posted by eldragonfly5th time, but thats ok.....you keep hiding like a good boy. Kinda ironic how your location is "logicland" and yet you do exactly the oppsite.
Irrelevant. Dragonfire, you need to show that players with an arbitrarily high rating here are also think that using books and databases is not cheating.
12 May 08
Originally posted by eldragonflyNo players with a "high" rating here, arbitary or otherwise, have come out in support of your ideas. I believe both I and other players rated considerably above you have all indicated that they think the use of books and DBs is acceptable. Can you produce a single player rated above 2000 who thinks otherwise?
Irrelevant. Dragonfire, you need to show that players with an arbitrarily high rating here are also think that using books and databases is not cheating.
I note you are rated 1380 which was a rating I last achieved 33 years ago. Then I got a few books and soon I had added 500 rating points to it.
If we met OTB I would beat you without a book. Indeed I would beat you even if I allowed you to use a book. Any time you want to visit Fareham just PM me and we can get together on our club night (Tuesday) for me to demonstrate this simple fact. Books and DBs blindly followed do not make you a better player whilst absorbing and understanding the contents does but that, as has been said so many times before, is hard work. In fact I have had to reduce my game load to give me time to use books and if I ever start using a DB seriously I will need even more time for each move.
12 May 08
2 edits
Originally posted by Dragon FireNo player over 1600 has come out against database use in this thread so far.
No players with a "high" rating here, arbitary or otherwise, have come out in support of your ideas. I believe both I and other players rated considerably above you have all indicated that they think the use of books and DBs is acceptable. Can you produce a single player rated above 2000 who thinks otherwise?
This thread started with an honest question, quickly answered, by a 1500. Then a 1300 honed in on the implied question from the initial post that remained unanswered. A 1600 was the highest rated player to express any doubts on the first page.
On the second page, a mid 1500 became the highest rated player to express qualms regarding book use.
A mid 1800 questioned some of the claims of the database promoting crowd, but also professed to be a database user. The resulting discussion highlighted lazy database use that might still confer an advantage, and productive hard work with databases that might improve online and OTB play. One post by this mid 1800 bears repeating:
Originally posted by Varenka
I agree that in order to get the most benefit out of books/databases, we need to use our brains.
But my difference of opinion is what benefit we may get by doing quick/lazy lookups with only a minimal amount of checking. I think the benefits can still be significant in some games.
I played this game recently: Game 4892521
It lasted 11 moves, 10 of which I got from my database without doing any hardwork at all. Now, I'm not saying this is the norm - it's the exception - but these things do happen.
12 May 08
Originally posted by Dragon FireI admire the way you post directly and challenge eldragonfly. Everyone is entitled to views... his views however conflict with that very statement!
No players with a "high" rating here, arbitary or otherwise, have come out in support of your ideas. I believe both I and other players rated considerably above you have all indicated that they think the use of books and DBs is acceptable. Can you produce a single player rated above 2000 who thinks otherwise?
I note you are rated 1380 which was a rati ...[text shortened]... o use books and if I ever start using a DB seriously I will need even more time for each move.
I would guess that s/he will not even read your post though, because s/he is most likely under 10 from his frequent use of the word girlyboy. 🙄
12 May 08
Originally posted by curseknightEverything I said to him applies equally to you or indeed any other player who has never bothered to read a book and argues against their use.
I admire the way you post directly and challenge eldragonfly. Everyone is entitled to views... his views however conflict with that very statement!
I would guess that s/he will not even read your post though, because s/he is most likely under 10 from his frequent use of the word girlyboy. 🙄
Of course your rating hasn't stabilised yet so I don't know if its 1400 or 1800 or more but I guarantee that if its the top end of this range or better and you claim not to have used books that you are lying. Of course if your rating is 2000+ then you may very well beat me but I won't believe you got there without using books and if you were to claim you did not use books or DBs here I would be highly supicious.
12 May 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Dragon FireWrong. Nor have any players, beyond the few confused individuals here, come out in support of using books and databases to help decide moves in a game. Your hollow and ridiculous justifications are plain silly and just don't wash.
No players with a "high" rating here, arbitary or otherwise, have come out in support of your ideas.
12 May 08
2 edits
Originally posted by eldragonfly"Few confused individuals" are you and persons who shares your views. And its obvious that you are simply ignoring facts which does not match with your illusions.
Wrong. Nor have any players, beyond the few confused individuals here, come out in support of using books and databases to help decide moves in a game. Your hollow and ridiculous justifications are plain silly and just don't wash.