Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 19 Aug '06 09:14
    CC chess allows the use of opening databases and opening books to be consulted whilst playing the game. CC chess also allows the use of analysis feature i.e. moving the pieces to see what happens. ICC does not bar the use of engines and so you have the top ICC exponents actively using programs in their games. One ICC grandmaster beat an early version of Hydra using several programs (and of course the opening databases and opening books). See Why didn’t he play without any engine assistance (he used a combination of several engines)?

    Can anyone show me any top CC exponents who simultaneously excel in OTB chess? Is it that the "assistance" in CC nullifies chess ability completely?

    See this game at the British Championship. What would have happened if this was a CC or ICC game. Definitely the much lower ranked player would have played like a GM and not lost in such a manner. Is it a coincidence that the officials have added a column as type - human?

    [Event "93rd ch-GBR"]
    [Site "Swansea WLS"]
    [Date "2006.08.08"]
    [Round "2"]
    [White "Gormally, D"]
    [Black "Hodgson, Jo"]
    [Result "1-0"]
    [WhiteElo "2513"]
    [BlackElo "2218"]
    [TimeControl "40/120:300"]
    [Termination "normal"]
    [PlyCount "62"]
    [WhiteType "human"]
    [BlackType "human"]

    1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Nf3 c5 8. Rb1 O-O 9. Be2 cxd4 10. cxd4 Qa5 11. Bd2 Qxa2 12. O-O Bg4 13. Bg5 h6 14. Bh4 a5 15. h3 Bxf3 16. Bxf3 Rd8 17. d5 g5 18. Bg3 Nd7 19. Rxb7 a4 20. Bg4 Ne5 21. Bxe5 Bxe5 22. Rxe7 Bf6 23. Rb7 Rab8 24. Rc7 Be5 25. Rc6 Kg7 26. Bh5 Qb2 27. Qxa4 Ra8 28. Qd1 Ra2 29. Qf3 Rd7 30. Qf5 Ra1 31. g3 Bf6 1-0

    In CC most of the opening moves are "assisted/book/GM" moves while in ICC virtually all of the moves are "assisted/book/GM/engine" rendering the contests illegitimate. It becomes an issue of who has the bigger OB than the other and in ICC who has stronger engines than the others. A 2000 player in OTB chess will always play like a 2000 in the opening middlegame and endgame phases. If he plays at 2500 in any phase of the game but then reverts to 2000 for the rest of the game is he not cheating himself?

    Of course I realise that not all CC or ICC players are "assisted" in this manner and a few actually have the goal of improving their OTB play/practising openings etc

    z00t! z00t!
  2. Standard member wormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    19 Aug '06 09:33 / 1 edit
    tööt tööt.

    I wonder if hockey players make good football players. as hockey players are allowed to use skates to glide around, where as football players have to run the whole time. except ronaldo of course.

    I think top of the line football players will always play stronger football than hockey players. a hockey player might be tactically and strategically as strong, but take away his skates and he'll be in immense trouble.

    edit: ever heard the frase: "the best way to progress as a chess player, is to play a lot of slow games?"
  3. 19 Aug '06 11:03 / 1 edit
    In my opinion using books and databases during the game seriously weakens your chess ability.

    I'm more interested in my over the board play, which is why I never use books or databases in internet games. If this means I get lousy positions out of the opening then that's fine, it just helps me realise what I need to work on.

    I don't mind at all if my opponents use books to find the best lines in my pet openings, as this prepares me for the occassion when I play a player over the board who knows my opening as well as or better than me!
  4. 19 Aug '06 11:10
    I think using databases and books dosen't hurt at all as long as you understand the moves you make, and if you keep checking a database it will help you learn the lines, however i realised that moving the pieces around with the analyse board or a real board has hurt my visualisation a bit.
  5. 19 Aug '06 12:31
    I have always considered myself a CC player as opposed to an OTB player. This was mostly because of where I lived and the fact that, unlike today, there were few tmts. in my otb days. Also when I started there weren't all that many chess players. Thus, while I've never had any problems otb with openings, and play ending pretty good because of cc play, my abiltiy to visualize the position more than a few moves ahead has been affected because of the habit of shifting pieces. Also, I always analyze from the White side regardless of my color. The end result is my otb rating has varied between 1800-2100 while my cc play has varied between 2000-2280...usually about a 200 point difference.

    I think you have to take S. Smaug's approach with cc if you don't want it to adversly affect you otb and, at the same time, use it to your advantage.

    Some CC players that have excelled otb over the years: Hans Berliner, Robert Steinmeyer and CJS Purdy come to mind. I'm not counting Paul Keres because he played cc only in his youth. Robert Byrne also tried cc as a young player. I'd say excelling at both is an exception though. Most CC GM's that I can think of, if they play otb, are usually not much more than masters. If they use engines then who can really say how good somebody like Ivar Bern is otb?
  6. Standard member Wulebgr
    19 Aug '06 13:54
    As with anything else, how you progress is a consequence of how you train. If your goal is to use CC as training for OTB, then certain decisions are needed regarding how you use dbs and the analysis board. If CC performance is the end in and of itself, then who cares how you perform OTB?

    (BTW, the vast majority of players here have never played a rated OTB game.)
  7. Standard member Amaurote
    No Name Maddox
    19 Aug '06 13:57
    I don't understand this at all. I play correspondence chess because it's accessible (I don't have the time or inclination for chess clubs), and it's undoubtedly improved my knowledge of the game; top-rated professional players don't need it because they have access to other top-rated players on a constant basis.
  8. 19 Aug '06 14:14
    Originally posted by Wulebgr

    (BTW, the vast majority of players here have never played a rated OTB game.)
    How many do you think see chess as a "video game" where you don't even need a chess set? Personally, I'm old enough that I have to set up a board!
  9. Standard member Dragon Fire
    Lord of all beasts
    19 Aug '06 14:21
    Originally posted by Wulebgr
    the vast majority of players here have never played a rated OTB game.
    How sad! :'(
  10. 19 Aug '06 15:31
    Originally posted by Dragon Fire
    How sad! :'(
  11. Standard member Dragon Fire
    Lord of all beasts
    19 Aug '06 15:48
    Originally psoted by Dragon Fire
    How sad :'(

    Originally posted by Nordlys
    Because it is much more fun to thrash human players over the board and see the look on their face as you pound them into the ground.

    Alternatively if they pound you into the ground they feel so guilty they buy you a drink afterwards!
  12. 19 Aug '06 15:56 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Dragon Fire
    Because it is much more fun to thrash human players over the board and see the look on their face as you pound them into the ground.

    Alternatively if they pound you into the ground they feel so guilty they buy you a drink afterwards!
    Do you need to play rated OTB games for that?
  13. 19 Aug '06 16:24
    If you want to improve your chess, join a club and start playing OTB chess. Anyone who can't share in this moment is missing out greatly.

    Anyways, I'm on this site to improve my OTB play. I used opening databases in my games here and when I play OTB after awhile I start remebering my openings from here and thus play better opening in OTB. So CC helps me for that.

    Although I haven't really started planning in the middlegame, I will give it a try on here since you have a great deal of time and eventually it might stick with me and I can use it in OTB.

    So CC is good for openings and planning.

    The one thing I don't like is the analyse board. During OTB games you get lazy and don't calculate very well and wish you could move the pieces around. So what I do is set up a real board for CC, calculate in my head and only then do I move the pieces around. This does 2 thing. First it forces you to pretend you are playing otb and calculate in your head. Seconds, when you start moving the pieces around you can see if you miscalculated and correct is so you don't lose the game and lose CC points. Most people use the analyse board and if you dont' use it then you are at a disadvatage, so might as well do it in your head first and then check after.

    Sometimes I get lazy and just use the analyse board. My calculation does get slightly worst for OTB games but I do a lot of tactics. I'm sure someone who doesn't do tactics and solely uses the analyse board would have really bad calculation in OTB games.
  14. Standard member Keltamaksa
    19 Aug '06 16:41
    Referring to the first post: It's just a game. Are you sure you don't take it too seriously?
  15. 19 Aug '06 17:07
    seeing as I don't play OTB, nor am I "training" for it, I just play CC, and depending on my mood and the will to win, I will use opening books, databases, and of course Notepad and the analysis board to look 8-12 moves ahead. **

    CC chess, IMO is the aim for perfection, Duboius and "pychological" play won't get you far, but solid idea's, tactic's, openings and stratgedy will.

    Also, CC is a great opurtunity to learn ---In my CC games I will often find myself playing complex endings, And because of the amount of time I have, i'll go off and read a chapter in a relevant endgame book, then move - hence, I learn.

    And I somewhat doubt the use of the analysis board is detrimental to visualization skills, I should imagine it neither harms or helps.

    **most of the time I simply can't be bothered to do that mind.