"Fair" Play on RHP

Personally I use a database extensively, this is CC chess after all. People still use book moves OTB, it just means they have to memorise them. I am sure most masters have thousands of moves memorised, but this isn't the fun part of the game for me. Where a game gets interesting is where it deviates from book moves, and this is what I think most people enjoy.

Anybody thats any good at CC will use databases, in at least some of their games, period.

Those who don't are knowingly putting themselves at a disadvantage, and if they wan't to argue that they should, then be my guest; it makes my game that much easier when they lose in the opening.

First, let me apologize for sounding so ignorant but what is MCO and what are databases?
Now that said, just a comment about using books. I find that after about 10 moves or so, any of us common rated folks deviate far from the books making us on our own anyway. It is that way OTB as well as in CC. I wish there was an analysis board sitting next to me when I play OTB. I am wearing that thing out here in RHP.

Dunno about MCO, but here are a few examples of databases:

http://www.365chess.com/opening.php

http://www.playtheimmortalgame.com/gamesexplorer/

It has to be said that you need to take the info in here with a pinch of salt. There are two games I am playing at the moment where the database reckons I have a high chance of winning, but quite frankly I think I will be lucky to draw.

Where the databases are taken from OTB games they may not translate well to CC games. Often a strong OTB move may rely on psychological factors or time factors. OTB a player may win due to the element of surprise, but with several days to consider a move there may be a strong counter.

Originally posted by Porky1016
First, let me apologize for sounding so ignorant but what is MCO ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Chess_Openings

Originally posted by TerrierJack
This is a silly argument. When you enter the Ruy Lopez with Bb5 are you playing your own move or are you just following theory? It is the same for any other 'book' line. As long as you are not firing up an engine (or another human) then you are not cheating. The whole history of chess is available to every player at every move. Positions are not chess. ...[text shortened]... ur large library what will that guarantee? I'll guarantee the better player will usually win.

If it's legal, it's OK by me. But let's face reality. Assume you're a 1200 player. What is the real difference between sifting through the files until you find the opening position you are in, and doing whatever experts have concluded is the best move, versus setting up the position on fritz and seeing what that "expert" decides is the best move? What if there is a chess machine that uses db look up only, for the openings? Should it be legal to use it? It only saves time. It's a search engine. What's the real difference between asking five 1900+ buddies to look at your opening position and doing what the most of them tell you they would do, versus going to RHP Games Explorer and doing whatever the most 1900+ players have done in that position?

Originally posted by chesstora
The point I was attempting to get across was play your CC as if you were playing OTB.

Why?

Originally posted by JS357
If it's legal, it's OK by me. But let's face reality. Assume you're a 1200 player. What is the real difference between sifting through the files until you find the opening position you are in, and doing whatever experts have concluded is the best move, versus setting up the position on fritz and seeing what that "expert" decides is the best move? What if ther ...[text shortened]... RHP Games Explorer and doing whatever the most 1900+ players have done in that position?

you seem to have absolutely no idea what databases are about.

Originally posted by wormwood
you seem to have absolutely no idea what databases are about.

Perhaps my terminology needs the benefit of the doubt? I'm not stupid.

Originally posted by JS357
Perhaps my terminology needs the benefit of the doubt? I'm not stupid.

First of all, it takes you just as long to look up the moves in Fritz as it does in a db, but that's beside the point I'd say. You say using a DB for a 1200 player is effectively cheating? What about as a 2200 player? The only difference here is that most players at that level will have memorised the recommended moves 10 moves deep, and will only have to check the db once their knowledge runs out.

Not using a DB here is simply putting yourself at a disadvantage. It's exactly the same as competing in the Tour De France with your ten year old, 3 gear bike, because "all this modern technology unfairly improves your results."

As I tried to explain in my earlier post following the lines from a database in no way guarantees a win. A lot of the "winning moves" on the database don't actually work out against a competent opponent.

Unlike a chess engine you WILL run out of suggested moves sooner or later, and if you don't understand why you have been playing those moves up to this point chances are you will lose.

If you are a professional chess player, then yes you can spends hours a day memorising openings, but personally I don't have time. The skill in chess isn't about a test of memory, it's about spotting combinations.

Originally posted by Willzzz
As I tried to explain in my earlier post following the lines from a database in no way guarantees a win. A lot of the "winning moves" on the database don't actually work out against a competent opponent.

Unlike a chess engine you WILL run out of suggested moves sooner or later, and if you don't understand why you have been playing those moves up to this p ...[text shortened]... time. The skill in chess isn't about a test of memory, it's about spotting combinations.

Let me add to this with a hypothetical example of how databases differ in effect from engines, and how statistics lie.

Patzer looks at database and sees that candidate move "A" wins 99% of the time at the GM level, with players playing that move and winning 99 times and losing only once.

What patzer does not know is that the move won 99 times until the antidote was found, which lost and effectively refuted the variation, which is no longer played.

Because the variation is completely refuted, no one plays it anymore, so the original candidate move still shows a 99% success rate, even though it has been refuted.

A database is a tool, but you really have to go beyond the stats and "up and down" lines to get a true feel for the "state of the art" for any given position. It's still a judgment call, and that's why we play out the moves.

In addition, a database does not give evaluations or assessments, unless you use the database to find an annotated game which has assessments within it. Databases are raw data for the most part.

Originally posted by Mephisto2
I fully concur with the spirit behind the statements. However, I have a side remark: there is no valid reason in my mind to 'forbid' engine use in unrated/setup games, if this fits into what both players are up to. It doesn't affect ratings or statistics, yet it allows for a broader approach to coaching, teaching, experimenting, sparring partnering... Perh ...[text shortened]... ature that allows to make such games invisible to the rest of the community could make sense.

Perhaps clause 3b in the TOS should begin "Except in unrated games, while a game is in progress...."

The obvious reason for not allowing box use in unrated games
is because it would result in computer v computer games.

Originally posted by Willzzz

A lot of the "winning moves" on the database don't actually work out against a competent opponent

It's possible to only include games with players rated above e.g. 2500. Then I think the vast majority of moves are of a decent quality.

Unlike a chess engine you WILL run out of suggested moves sooner or later

So, if a chess engine was allowed for the initial 15 moves only, that would be fine?

While using opening references is part of CC and legal (impossible to enforce, if otherwise), I think it detracts from the spirit of chess. Of course, nobody is forced to use such references, but to compete on an equal basis it is required.