Back to the books. I agree they are ok, in fact almost the best thing that people can do for their chess game. Obviously, according to the rules of this site they are not illegal, and grumbling about that is pointless. I'm just pointing out that using the books to compare play during the game seems exactly the same as engines.
AFTER and BEFORE games, study of openings etc. or even study of game principles during a game (it is not in direct reference to your position, but to ideas you must apply, ie endgame analysis) is all great.
Opening from the book where you have a clear tactically sound analysis of your position 12-20 plies deep during the game is not using your brain, and I feel is cheating. At that point it is no longer correspondence chess but directed chess, until you go out of the book.
Then again, with this argument I have a problem looking at memorizing entire lines of openings with all variation and playing like that, how that would differ. There it still isn't applying the ideas you learn, just following directions... So despite my instant recoil, I'm still fighting toward my opinion on correspondence as a whole. Mainly: what counts as correspondence? (obviously I think the opening from the book wouldn't, just as having capablanca over my shoulder telling me what to do wouldn't be correspondence)
1 edit
Originally posted by eldragonflySquelchbelch opined that they probably used books and/or databases, not engines. If you're going to be overly critical and contentious, the least you can do is be more careful that you use accurate wording. I wouldn't go as far as calling you a troll, but your posts definitely have a slight trollish quality to them.
Those are rather alarming statistics, these unnamed players shouldn't be pinned as using books and/or chess engines to help them, i would like to see some verifiable proof. Otherwise it is just plain ordinary nonsense in every sense of the word.
Edit - And now I'm done with this thread. Eldragonfly, and to a lesser extent, headsy, have succeeded in dragging this thread down to undesirable depths, so I won't comment further in this thread.
Originally posted by Mad RookIndeed.
Squelchbelch opined that they probably used books and/or databases, not engines. If you're going to be overly critical and contentious, the least you can do is be more careful that you use accurate wording. I wouldn't go as far as calling you a troll, but your posts definitely have a slight trollish quality to them.
Someone who doesn't know the difference between an openings database & an engine should keep their trap shut IMO.
Originally posted by Mad Rooki meant chess databases, your worthless ad hominem speaks for itself.
Squelchbelch opined that they probably used books and/or databases, not engines. If you're going to be overly critical and contentious, the least you can do is be more careful that you use accurate wording. I wouldn't go as far as calling you a troll, but your posts definitely have a slight trollish quality to them.
1 edit
Originally posted by eldragonflyYou're just a troll.
Irrelevant. Tell me more about this idea of using books and databases during on-line games to improve your chess abilities.
If you read my previous posts, I already stated that I found opening study done on this site with the use of books to be beneficial to my OTB club games.
I don't think you read or at least fully understand anyone's posts. Perhaps you skim-read them or something.
You jump in feet-first & then get defensive whilst back-peddling at a rate of knots.
Anyway, I'm not interested in further discussion of this with you.
Toodle-pip.
🙂
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSame here. I thought that at least while you are looking at the board, you can't read books. Of course, since the games are over a month long, I'm gong to read books inbetween, but I never read while I was looking at the board of one of my games....
really, what a muppet i have been, i assumed that you had to play OTB style on every game!😲
1 edit
Originally posted by eldragonflyIts obvious that use of books and databases will help improve your play. But make no mistake doing so requires a lot of effort to understand what is best play and more importantly why.Once you know this it is of course also possible to implement this OTB.
Irrelevant. Tell me more about this idea of using books and databases during on-line games to improve your chess abilities.
You need to bear in mind that people are here for different reasons. I am here to improve OTB play and if I did not use all the resources permitted to me by this site then I would not be improving.
Because I do use those resources I have been able to achieve a rating 150-200 points above my OTB grade and that OTB grade is slowing improving. If on the other hand I decided to blitz everything and didn't really think about my moves and took on 100s of games I would only achieve a rating 150-200 points below my OTB grade which would undoubtedly then drop.
What I am doing is certainly not cheating and is not even unethical. It is allowed and, indeed, expected by most people and my profile tells you I will do it.
2 edits
Originally posted by headsyRandomly pick any game from a player in the top 100 on this site & then plug it into chesslive.de & see what the match-up is with pre-existing games.
so squelch you cheat on here to make your otb better well dont we all feel better about that how can you have the cheek to call people names when this is a forum and we are all allowed an opinion we all pay a subscription and have the right to a fair game
Then ask the admins to ban those involved for "cheating" by your definitions.
See how far you get. Good luck!
🙄
I remind you again:
Terms of service
3.(b)"...but you may reference books, databases consisting of previously played games between human players, and other pre-existing research materials."
Don't like the rules - tough luck, pal!
1 edit
Originally posted by eldragonflyI started playing postal chess in the late 1970s, took it up again in the mid-1990s, and since 2003 have seen Turn Based Chess (TBC) replace postcards and email. In correspondence chess, book use is a long and respected element of the game. With the emergence of databases and TBC, the role of "books" has become more complex.
i still see no solid proof that the whole idea behind on-line chess gaming sites is to use books and databases.
I have played at more than a dozen sites, and currently have active games at three. See my reviews at http://www.angelfire.com/poetry/wulebgr/corr.htm. All of the TBC sites that endure not only permit database and book use, they encourage it, and they implement site features to facilitate it. Most also ban engine use, and implement mechanisms for punishing violators.
Live online chess play, such as you'll finds at playchess, FICS, ICC, and others, as well as pseudo-chess sites like yahoo, do not permit the use of aids, except when the user is designated an engine or centaur.
Chess is played many ways at varied time controls. You need to recognize the differences between blitz and correspondence, TBC and OTB.
Every TBC site with forums has had this debate, usually once every six months or so. Sometimes the side opposed to database and book use presents arguments. Sadly, that does not seem to be the case in this instance.
Originally posted by Dragon FireAs Dragon Fire emphasizes, and this point bears repeating, database use is [i[not an aid that reduces chess effort[/i], it substantially increases the demands upon the player. Because I am lazy or busy or have other priorities, I use databases in a fraction of my games. Consequently, mt rating here in comparable to my OTB rating rather than a few hundred points above. If I put in more effort, using my opening aids systematically, I too could approach a rating of 2000.
Its obvious that use of books and databases will help improve your play. But make no mistake doing so requires a lot of effort to understand what is best play and more importantly why.Once you know this it is of course also possible to implement this OTB.
Originally posted by WulebgrYou’re saying that by using opening aids more, you’d expect to improve your RHP rating much more than your OTB rating. I’d agree that this effect is probably more common than those who improve both ratings equally as a result of using opening aids in CC.
mt rating here in comparable to my OTB rating rather than a few hundred points above. If I put in more effort, using my opening aids systematically, I too could approach a rating of 2000.