There have been frequent forum threads debating the rules and/or the ethics of database use. However, I've seen precious little discussion of how such resources benefit the player. Given that database use is an aspect of chess skill, rather than a substitute for it, I'd appreciate some feedback on how to develop that skill.
How do successful correspondence players use books and databases?
I don't have a set pattern, as I'm not certain I've found the most effective, nor the most satisfying approach. Some of those I've tried:
ECO Lines. I look for the most favorable lines in the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings. When lines branch, some may end with substantial advantage or slight advantage for my opponent, while others end in unclear. I'll pick the moves ending in unclear over slight, and slight over substantial. Transpositions often make the work following this method much harder. Chess Informant Opening Monographs take this method to a higher level.
Percentages. After selecting my candidate moves, I'll use ChessBase to find the winning percentages and average ELO change for each move. Generally the winning percentages are sufficient, but the ELO averages offer caution. There are many scholastic games that skew the percentages in certain lines, such as the Fried Liver Attack. One need only defend accurately to defeat the FLA, but white wins ~70% in ChessBase online.
Opening Books (ChessBase). Engines, such as Fritz, come with an opening book to guide their moves. These books can be viewed as a type of carefully pruned database. I've also created my own books from particular selections of games. For example, a book created with only decisive games between players with an average rating above 2300 allows a more refined approach to playing the percentages. These books can be edited with evaluations, and in time, can incorporate the results of a lot of intense study. Certain opponents with lots of available games have books named for them so I can play their worst openings in our battles.
Opening Books (printed). In a few games last summer, I slavishly followed the recommendations of Larry Kaufman in The Chess Advantage in Black and White. This practice introduced the Meran system to my repertoire against the Queen's Gambit. At other times, I've used other opening manuals to research the best lines in new openings I'm trying to learn, as well as old ones I'm trying to perfect. My stack of books on the Sveshnikov and Kalashnikov Sicilian becames well-worn from this practice (and lots of post-it notes stick out with text like "GM-aspirant vs. Wulebgr, Golden Knights 1998"😉.
Often, of course, I'll use several of these methods together. That's when the serious research begins.
Originally posted by WulebgrI mainly use my filtered database of half a million games. All titled players playing under standard time controls in the last 5 years. The percentages in this database give a very good idea of the current state of theory in the opening. Of course when the games in the position get fewer you have to do some checking to ensure flawed games (games where white gets a big advantage then blunders to give a draw say) aren't influenceing your choices.
There have been frequent forum threads debating the rules and/or the ethics of database use. However, I've seen precious little discussion of how such resources benefit the player. Given that database use is an aspect of chess skill, rather than a substitute for it, I'd appreciate some feedback on how to develop that skill.
How do successful corresponde ...[text shortened]... f course, I'll use several of these methods together. That's when the serious research begins.
The approach worked well in Game 1456758 (Yes it's in progress but will be finishing with Kb1 Qb2🙄. I had to do some serious checking of my source game (in which an unrated black beat a 2200 white). It seems if white had found 18. Qa3 Qxa3 19. Kxa3 Nxc3 we would have had an even game. However any other 18th move loses immediately to Nc4+ winning the queen or allowing mate (as in the game).
I use opening books to check for ideas and plans in openings when the game leaves the book. Also it should be noted that the Opening Books that come with Chessbase engines are tuned for best engine performance and not for use as a human-human resource. They aim for positions heavy in tactics and avoid closed positions.
Originally posted by buddy2I don't think he works. He lives in New Zealand, and probably lives the country life. But, there's nothing wrong with that. I've been in Aussie land, and I wish I had of visited New Zealand. Heard they have extremely clean water in Kiwi land.
Where do you get the time for all this?
Originally posted by powershakerI'm a student. We have the best tapwater in the world (it's sold in bottles in other parts of the world) here in Christchurch (a city of 400k people).
I don't think he works. He lives in New Zealand, and probably lives the country life. But, there's nothing wrong with that. I've been in Aussie land, and I wish I had of visited New Zealand. Heard they have extremely clean water in Kiwi land.
Originally posted by XanthosNZI well behind your rating but wondered if (on the way up) you experienced the same as I? My otb game has suffered badly, which I am putting down to too much chess relying on use of opening databases and especially the analyze board facility. So I have decided to play less chess on here (and gameknot) and try and get a better balance. I'm not sure what my otb rating is but I know it's a long way behind the 1800 I am here. I know I have been sitting in front of a pc too much because I have just joined a chess club and find it all slightly strange i.e. using a clock, writing down the move and even sitting accross from my opponent (yes sad) to the point where I know I am not playing at the level that I am capable of. I am hoping of course that it will all come together as I have only had about 10 otb games recently (its years after that).
I mainly use my filtered database of half a million games. All titled players playing under standard time controls in the last 5 years. The percentages in this database give a very good idea of the current state of theory in the opening. Of course when the games in the position get fewer you have to do some checking to ensure flawed games (games where whit ...[text shortened]... e as a human-human resource. They aim for positions heavy in tactics and avoid closed positions.
Originally posted by stevetoddI don't play enough non-correspondance chess to notice any atrophy of my OTB skills. It is easy to learn to rely on the ability to move things about through the analyse board feature, in chessbase or similar. However, some visualization exercises and perhaps a little blindfold chess will soon put that right (I hung my queen in 7 moves in my first blindfold game). What I have noticed is my ability to sit and study a position in depth has greatly improved since I started playing here. I am slowly relying less on intuition and more on calculation.
I well behind your rating but wondered if (on the way up) you experienced the same as I? My otb game has suffered badly, which I am putting down to too much chess relying on use of opening databases and especially the analyze board facility. So I have decided to play less chess on here (and gameknot) and try and get a better balance. I'm not sure what my ...[text shortened]... it will all come together as I have only had about 10 otb games recently (its years after that).
Originally posted by XanthosNZQuantity really counts. When I was playing schools league, you'd get a game a week and a few practice games in between. The rest was just study. I played some rubbish when I first started here, but now I'm getting to reach more familiarity with positions and openings and getting better at recognising threats. Wish we had the 'net 30 years ago. Generally I don't use the analyse board too much except when it starts getting complicated. In simpler situations I can work out 3-4 moves ahead and this is usually enough. Other times it's just straightforward positional/strategic tactics that decide the move with no clear answer but no immediate threats looking 2-3 moves ahead. Sometimes, it's gut feel.
I don't play enough non-correspondance chess to notice any atrophy of my OTB skills. It is easy to learn to rely on the ability to move things about through the analyse board feature, in chessbase or similar. However, some visualization exercises and perhaps a little blindfold chess will soon put that right (I hung my queen in 7 moves in my first blindfol ...[text shortened]... ved since I started playing here. I am slowly relying less on intuition and more on calculation.
Which database engine do you use? I rely on the online chessgames.com. I really recommend a database BTW. It's a very important tool in improving your opening play. You don't have to follow them but at least they point you towards the important strategic directions. Some players feel it's good to move off the book early but there are perils involved, such as making up an inferior opening. My opponent here moved away from the book pretty early and I thought he looked okay, until I spotted the bad pawn move. With best play, he should maybe have gone down a pawn only, but it was not to be:
Game 1602856
Originally posted by buffalobillI use Chessbase to access my databases. It does everything I need it to and more.
Quantity really counts. When I was playing schools league, you'd get a game a week and a few practice games in between. The rest was just study. I played some rubbish when I first started here, but now I'm getting to reach more familiarity with positions and openings and getting better at recognising threats. Wish we had the 'net 30 years ago. Genera ...[text shortened]... best play, he should maybe have gone down a pawn only, but it was not to be:
Game 1602856
Originally posted by XanthosNZI use Chessbase to access my databases, and use Fritz to access my analysis engines. I also use Chess Informant Reader and CI Expert to access their publications. I use Arena for conducting engine tournaments and training against Winboard engines.
I use Chessbase to access my engines. It does everything I need it to and more.
i suppose my main problem is when i bought my old copy of fritz6 at target for fun it came with no manual. so i have no understanding of the abbreviations (N Av Pref Fritz Prob [%]) at the top of the openings book. what they mean and the meaning of the numbers below. i have attempted to poke around the net to find something which explains but seem unable to figure this great mystery out. any help would be greatly appreciated.
Originally posted by MrWattThis is what you see in the openings book tree:
i suppose my main problem is when i bought my old copy of fritz6 at target for fun it came with no manual. so i have no understanding of the abbreviations (N Av Pref Fritz Prob [%]) at the top of the openings book. what they mean and the meaning of the numbers below. i have attempted to poke around the net to find something which explains but seem unable to figure this great mystery out. any help would be greatly appreciated.
Moves: (Tree icon) Sometimes a move will appear in grey, which means that it was never played, but leads to a position that results from some other line.
Number of games: (N) The header displays the total number of games which led to the current board position. The N column displays the number of games in which each move was executed.
%: Percentage score achieved by the move, always from the point of view of the colour to play. If the number of games is low, the percentage is given in grey because it does not have great statistical significance.
Av: Elo average of the players of the move. If only a small percentage of the players had a rating, then the number is given in grey.
Perf : Elo performance of the move. This is the rating a player would have achieved in a fictitious tournament, playing the move in all his games.
Weights: The weights allocated to each move control the probability with which it will choose the move in a game. The value can range between –125 to +125. The values are initially set to zero, but may change when the program actually plays games in the individual variations. You could say that the program is learning from experience. The weights can be manually modified by right-clicking a move and selecting “Change weight”. To reset all weights click Edit – Openings book – Reset weights. After that, the program will use only the purely statistical information to select its moves.
Prob and [%]: The first value is the purely statistical probability of the move, based on the number of times it was played and the results achieved in the games that went into the book. This is the probability of the move being played by the program as long as the weights have not been changed – either manually or by automatic learning. The value on the right [%] is the practical probability of the program playing the move. This is a product of the statistical evaluation and the weights. If you change the latter you can see how the [%] value (but not the “Prob&rdquo😉 changes. In Book options you can determine how much the weights influence the probability of play.
I am still pretty new so I don't really know what is right or wrong around here, but recently I watched the Andrew Martin Chessbase DVD on King's Indian Defense and then played a game following that variation as far as it could go. That game just ended a couple of days ago, but I told my opponent the opening I was going to use and he used a book until it ran out as well. My resource lasted 2 or 3 moves longer than his did.
I have a game right now that didn't start as KID, but it looks like I can use some of what I learned from that other game and from the videos and I might have a decent attack on the king. Only time will tell I guess.
For me I there seems to be a couple of ways you can use the 'references'. One way is to just use them to gain an advantage you couldn't normally obtain on your own and get more wins. The other is to use them in combination with other references in the hope that what you do with the correspondence games can help you later in your regular games. I prefer the latter since I have at least some fundamental gist of what the opening is trying to develop.
Of course, having said all that, I have one game right now where the entire position is a mess and almost every move I make weakens the position a bit. I initiated an exchange that I think I am going to end up regretting but the person I am playing is really good (well, compared to me anyway). He started with an opening that I have never studied at all so I just made 'normal' developing moves since using a database would have been robotic at that point because I wouldn't know any of the theory behind the moves.