Originally posted by LanndonKaneChess books and databases will be consulted during play
Ok i'm getting of tired of this. Here is what I shall do
MY REGISTRATION OBLIGATIONS:
In consideration of my use of the Service, I represent that I am of legal age to form a binding contract and am not a person barred from receiving services under the laws of the United States or other applicable jurisdiction. I also agree to :
(a) I will not cre ...[text shortened]... g play
(c) I will not threaten or harass other users of this Service.
And that is that.
Read that over and over again.
Where do you see the word tablebases in there?
I'm getting tired of this also. It's not allowed. Live with it!
Originally posted by RahimKOxford english dictionary:
Chess books and databases will be consulted during play
Read that over and over again.
Where do you see the word tablebases in there?
I'm getting tired of this also. It's not allowed. Live with it!
da·ta·base ( P ) Pronunciation Key (dt-bs, dt-) Computer Science
n. also data base
A collection of data arranged for ease and speed of search and retrieval. Also called data bank.
Fits egtb's exactly
Do a Google search with "endgame tablebase". Get plenty of relevant sites using this term? Yes.
Do a Google search with "endgame database". Get plenty of relevant sites using this term? Yes.
So both the terms "tablebase" and "database" are widely used. And it doesn't matter if one is more common or correct than the other, both are common usage.
2 edits
Originally posted by YugaSorry man, gotta hear an admin say that, and im gonna have to see that darned terms of service file updated accordingly
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=27452
Endgame tablebases are not allowed at RHP.
See page 1 of the link I posted.
EDIT: with a valid reason, of course.
1 edit
Originally posted by RahimKNo worries... but I guess I can just use the following site:
Chess books and databases will be consulted during play
Read that over and over again.
Where do you see the word tablebases in there?
I'm getting tired of this also. It's not allowed. Live with it!
http://www.shredderchess.com/online-chess/online-databases/endgame-database.html
It does say *database* doesn't it? So must be ok?! ;-)
Originally posted by LanndonKaneEGTB's do give in-game status information. They'll show you how many moves are left until the game ends, with best play.
Yes of course there is always that, but tablebases dont take into account certain rules, like the 50 mve rule. So even though they are accurate 95& percent of the time, they are still a databse. Plus, Fritz also gives you an anlaysis, which of course is using an engine, which of course is cheating. My method on the other hand, doesn't give you any in-gam ...[text shortened]...
The point of them is to give you an advantage while you have it, much like an opening book.
They are accurate 100% of the time, if generated properly. The fact that some winning positions can't be realized due to the 50-move rule is irrelevant. In this case, the EGTB has proven that the ending is a draw due to the 50-move rule.
"Furthermore, egtb's are good only for 3-4-5-6 pieces. After you get to one or two, you are on your own."
You can never get to one, and have a draw with only two, because they're both Kings. 😛
"The point of them is to give you an advantage while you have it, much like an opening book."
No, they give you a guaranteed result. That's far more than any mere advantage.
2 edits
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemAlas, you are right. I shall therefore limit my answer to this:
EGTB's [b]do give in-game status information. They'll show you how many moves are left until the game ends, with best play.
They are accurate 100% of the time, if generated properly. The fact that some winning positions can't be realized due to the 50-move rule is irrelevant. In this case, the EGTB has proven that the ending is a draw due to th b]"
No, they give you a guaranteed result. That's far more than any mere advantage.[/b]
MY REGISTRATION OBLIGATIONS:
In consideration of my use of the Service, I represent that I am of legal age to form a binding contract and am not a person barred from receiving services under the laws of the United States or other applicable jurisdiction. I also agree to :
(a) I will not create more than one account.
(b) I will not use chess engines, chess software, chess computers or consult any third party to assist you in any game. Chess books and databases will be consulted during play
(c) I will not threaten or harass other users of this Service.
- Joined
- 26 May 02
- Moves
- 72546
I’m one of the game moderators (and can therefore speak on behalf of the site admin on such matters) and can confirm that endgame tablebases are definitely not allowed.
My colleague, Gatecrasher posted the following in a thread in April this year: Thread 40977
“A database, for the purposes of the Terms of Service, should consist of previously played games only. An endgame tablebase, i.e. Namilov, is not a database under this definition. Using an endgame tablebase to assist you in a game is cheating and a violation of section 3(b).
- The Game Mod Team”
Gatecrasher explained in great detail the reasoning behind this decision.
I think it would be very helpful if the TOS was updated in order to state explicitly that endgame tablebases are not permitted.
1 edit
Originally posted by David TebbAgreed, except I'd say it's a *necessary* update to the TOS. If the TOS doesn't get updated, the issue will remain.
I think it would be very helpful if the TOS was updated in order to state explicitly that endgame tablebases are not permitted.
- Joined
- 26 May 02
- Moves
- 72546
Originally posted by VarenkaWell, I'm not going to disagree with you. Russ should have amended the TOS a long time ago.
Agreed, except I'd say it's a *necessary* update to the TOS. If the TOS doesn't get updated, the issue will remain.
Incidentally, he should also put in a line warning against the discussion of games in progress. A lot of people post their in-progress games in the forums, asking for advice, without realising that they're breaking the rules.
Originally posted by LanndonKaneOh dear. Enjoy your membership whilst you can because you won't be on for very long.
Ok i'm getting of tired of this. Here is what I shall do
MY REGISTRATION OBLIGATIONS:
In consideration of my use of the Service, I represent that I am of legal age to form a binding contract and am not a person barred from receiving services under the laws of the United States or other applicable jurisdiction. I also agree to :
(a) I will not cre ...[text shortened]... g play
(c) I will not threaten or harass other users of this Service.
And that is that.
Originally posted by David TebbI agree, but there is an issue - I have John Nunn's secrets of Rook endgames, which was written by "data-mining" of endgame tablebases (EGTB). Now, it is clear that use of EGTBs is not allowed but the use of Nunn's book is. Most of the time there is not an issue - Lucena's position has been know for centuries - but some of the others in the Nunn book have not. The book, entirely about K+R+P v K+R, contains best lines that a player should be free to use here - unless you want to include results of data-mining as forbidden material - and, although there are plenty of K+R+P v K+R positions which don't appear in Nunn's book, hitting a line in the Nunn book is indistinguishable from using an EGTB. Unless you intend to check every relevant position against such texts it is going to be hard to distinguish cheating from legitimate research.
I’m one of the game moderators (and can therefore speak on behalf of the site admin on such matters) and can confirm that endgame tablebases are definitely not allowed.
My colleague, Gatecrasher posted the following in a thread in April this year: Thread 40977
“A database, for the purposes of the Terms of Service, should consist of pr ...[text shortened]... l if the TOS was updated in order to state explicitly that endgame tablebases are not permitted.
Although I will add that I recently downloaded about 1.6 Gb's of EGTB's (out of 7.3 Gbs for the full set of 3-4-5 piece EGTBs) I tryed to analyse my own endgames from them and discovered that I'd hit EGTB positions (that I have) in less than 50 (guesstimation) of the 1000 odd games I've completed on this site so they are only directly relevant for around 5% of games.
These things do have legitimate uses though; I watched the K+B+N v K longest checkmate a couple of times and then set SCID's EGTB window to training mode, and - after a number of false starts - now have a good chance of executing the mate in the unlikely event of it ever occurring.
Originally posted by LanndonKaneEven the strongest engines totally foul up the opening if left to play them on their own, engine - engine games will always follow human generated lines in the opening. There isn't yet such a thing as a machine generated opening database, which is not the case with EGTBs.
Yes they are computer generated, but nowhere does it say "computer generated databases arent allowed". I could use a general database from engine-engine games, and no one would complain about that.