10 Apr 06
I know there are some sites which allow you to play CC with books, db's and chess programs.
What does a CC rating for such CC places really mean?
Opening- Use db's, books, opening tree.
Middlegame- db's, Chess programs.
Endgame- Endgame tablebases.
Seems to be that a human can play the whole game without any "real" input. Basically, to me it seems like the better you are at using the resources, the higher your rating is, and doesn't depend much on your chess skill.
10 Apr 06
Originally posted by RahimKIt's been shown that even the best engines (Hydra and the like running on supercomputers) can be beaten by good players working in tandem with standard engines running on a laptop.
I know there are some sites which allow you to play CC with books, db's and chess programs.
What does a CC rating for such CC places really mean?
Opening- Use db's, books, opening tree.
Middlegame- db's, Chess programs.
Endgame- Endgame tablebases.
Seems to be that a human can play the whole game without any "real" input. Basically, to me it seems ...[text shortened]... ing the resources, the higher your rating is, and doesn't depend much on your chess skill.
10 Apr 06
Originally posted by RahimKI don't know of any sites that allow engine use, at least without labelling the account with a (C).
I know there are some sites which allow you to play CC with books, db's and chess programs.
What does a CC rating for such CC places really mean?
Opening- Use db's, books, opening tree.
Middlegame- db's, Chess programs.
Endgame- Endgame tablebases.
Seems to be that a human can play the whole game without any "real" input. Basically, to me it seems ...[text shortened]... ing the resources, the higher your rating is, and doesn't depend much on your chess skill.
10 Apr 06
Originally posted by marinakatombThat's not a "site". The ICCF is the only correspondence organization that I know of that allows engine use. There is an article on Ivar Bern, the new ICCF World Champion, in this month's Chess Life (the USCF publication). It says, in awe, that he once had 63 games going at once!
ICCF allows engines i believe, though i could be wrong...
10 Apr 06
Originally posted by marinakatombYes. ICCF allows engines.
ICCF allows engines i believe, though i could be wrong...
I think that it is worth noting that effective use of engines, when your opponent can do the same requires a particular sort of chess skill. Engines function as a substitute for chess skill only when they are disallowed, and thus employed only by cheaters.
I've argued elsewhere that database use is an element of chess skill. The same is true for engines. Follow closely the games and results of ChessBase's Freestyle tournament, and you'll see examples of creative application of skill to engine use: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3019.
10 Apr 06
1 edit
Originally posted by WulebgrI'm not sure I agree with this. People who can purchase better engines will have an inherent advantage. This really doesn't require any particular skill or effort on your part. Some people spend considerable time constructing their own personal databases which can give them a certain advantage, but you have to do this yourself. This is not true regarding the best engines.
Yes. ICCF allows engines.
I think that it is worth noting that effective use of engines, when your opponent can do the same requires a particular sort of chess skill. Engines function as a substitute for chess skill [b]only when they are disallowed, and thus employed only by cheaters.
I've argued elsewhere that database use is an element of chess s tive application of skill to engine use: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3019.[/b]
10 Apr 06
Originally posted by no1marauderBut you can also purchase gigantic or prepruned databases, these also give an advantage.
I'm not sure I agree with this. People who can purchase better engines will have an inherent advantage. This really doesn't require any particular skill or effort on your part. Some people spend considerable time constructing their own personal databases which can give them a certain advantage, but you have to do this yourself. This is not true regarding the best engines.
11 Apr 06
Originally posted by no1marauderSorry I didn't actually mean online sites in particular. I know there are some online CC sites which allow engine usage and some non online sites which allow engine usage and use e-mails or postage to play the game.
I don't know of any sites that allow engine use, at least without labelling the account with a (C).
11 Apr 06
Originally posted by WulebgrWell the freestyle tournaments, I don't know about this year who won since I haven't read the info, but last year ZackS won and they were what avg rating of 1600 OTB?
Yes. ICCF allows engines.
I think that it is worth noting that effective use of engines, when your opponent can do the same requires a particular sort of chess skill. Engines function as a substitute for chess skill [b]only when they are disallowed, and thus employed only by cheaters.
I've argued elsewhere that database use is an element of chess s ...[text shortened]... tive application of skill to engine use: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3019.[/b]
I think it has more to do with using the resources better and having that skill then it does having chess skill.
I'm not sure but I think Xan was talking about Gm+ computer vs hydra in CC? I wasn't think of it that way since GM sometimes have better understand of the position compared to a computer.
I was talking about the average person. This person from our club has a 2230 rating in CC chess which allows engines, db's, books. His OTB rating is around 1600-1700. To me his CC rating doesn't mean that much. How do i know that he simply isn't using say:
openings-db's, books, opening tree
middlegame- engine,db's
endgame-endgame tablebases
And basically doing no work, no real thinking.
I know computer + human gives you a higher rating but surely a strong chess program by it self can get close to master level.
11 Apr 06
Originally posted by RahimKif everyone else uses same resources similarly, I guess the expectancy would be that his AC-rating would be around 1600 too?
.... How do i know that he simply isn't using say:
openings-db's, books, opening tree
middlegame- engine,db's
endgame-endgame tablebases
And basically doing no work, no real thinking..
although AC is probably very different, and cannot be compared to otb in any way. -say if you took someone who was really good in planning and positional play, but sucked at tactics. then using an engine would give serious advantage for him. on the other hand, someone really good at tactics and bad at planning would get a lot less help from an engine. still he could be very strong otb.
11 Apr 06
Originally posted by RahimKPlease don't tell me what I'm talking about especially if you aren't sure.
Well the freestyle tournaments, I don't know about this year who won since I haven't read the info, but last year ZackS won and they were what avg rating of 1600 OTB?
I think it has more to do with using the resources better and having that skill then it does having chess skill.
I'm not sure but I think Xan was talking about Gm+ computer vs hydra in CC ...[text shortened]... gher rating but surely a strong chess program by it self can get close to master level.
To play in tandem with an engine you don't need to be able to see deep tactics, you don't need to not make blunders. What you need to be able to see the things the engines can't. A good intuition and theoretical and positional understanding are what is needed. GMs certainly have these but they aren't the only ones.
11 Apr 06
Originally posted by XanthosNZAlright, do you think a 1700 player would have such positional understanding during CC play?
Please don't tell me what I'm talking about especially if you aren't sure.
To play in tandem with an engine you don't need to be able to see deep tactics, you don't need to not make blunders. What you need to be able to see the things the engines can't. A good intuition and theoretical and positional understanding are what is needed. GMs certainly have these but they aren't the only ones.
Me playing CC vs a chess program on a decent computer and I think the computer would win. Similar to the CM vs Rhp game but there that one is like 10 on 1.
11 Apr 06
Originally posted by RahimKI think it is possible for a 1700 player to have such understanding, especially if they can crib theoretical knowledge from books (endgame results etc.) and the like in real time.
Alright, do you think a 1700 player would have such positional understanding during CC play?
Me playing CC vs a chess program on a decent computer and I think the computer would win. Similar to the CM vs Rhp game but there that one is like 10 on 1.
