"Fair" Play on RHP

Originally posted by wormwood
back when I used databases, it was commonplace that low rated players followed the main lines quite blindly. it made playing them very easy - you took them to a type of equal position YOU liked, then made any half decent move and watched them crumble within 10 moves. like fish in a barrel. -the guys who played their own random openings were always the most difficult opponents.

That sounds reasonable, you side step the theory and outplay them based on chess ability.

But what about the other scenario where two 1200 players are playing and one of them gains a significant advantage because of "cheap" database lookups? Consider a sharp opening with plenty of traps, where both players are tactically weak. A database then acts as a map through a minefield and also easily shows how to punish an opponent who makes a wrong step. It's legal and therefore fair as such, but I do see why some people dislike this aspect of CC.

Originally posted by Varenka
That sounds reasonable, you side step the theory and outplay them based on chess ability.

But what about the other scenario where two 1200 players are playing and one of them gains a significant advantage because of "cheap" database lookups? Consider a sharp opening with plenty of traps, where both players are tactically weak. A database then acts as a ...[text shortened]... t's legal and therefore fair as such, but I do see why some people dislike this aspect of CC.

I'm very skeptical about 1200s gaining any meaningful advantage by following database. the second their opponent steps outside theory it's 50/50 again, and normal 1200-statistics apply.

when I first took up dbs, my rating dropped 50 points. it's not trivial to use them to your advantage.

Hi V.

The trouble with DB's is that they don't show the traps just the
cold bland moves of someone else's game.
You do not know the conditions or cirmustances of the game.

Just posted a good look at a game by PureRWandB in the

How do I play in a LOW level tournament? thread,

This a out of book early doors and the sharper more aware player wins.
This is the way an OTB game goes.

The ability to see clearly two moves ahead and play an active game
is all that is required for one to become a good chess player.

The two move trick is King.

You need the opening edge with spit & polish when you play other
good players. And by that I mean the genuine over 2500 guys.

Quite frankly if a 1200 player makes it to 1400 by using a database is it a big deal? I would say that he deserves the rating because he has done the research. However if he hasn't learnt any tactics he is not likely to progress any further.

If the other player is laying traps with sharp lines, chances are that he looked that up somewhere too. If it's just two 1200 players blundering about chances are a database is of no use whatsoever.

Ultimately it's just a personal choice whether to use a database or not. If you are really serious about chess then memorising openings is probably better in the long run. It is an impressive ability to memorise openings, but analysis and tactics are far more impressive skills, ideally of course you would have both.

Originally posted by Willzzz
Quite frankly if a 1200 player makes it to 1400 by using a database is it a big deal? I would say that he deserves the rating because he has done the research. However if he hasn't learnt any tactics he is not likely to progress any further.

If the other player is laying traps with sharp lines, chances are that he looked that up somewhere too. If it's jus ...[text shortened]... t analysis and tactics are far more impressive skills, ideally of course you would have both.

yeah, dbs are a part of cc chess skills. if that takes a person from 1200 classical to 1400 cc, then he's 1400 in cc fair and square. two different games.

Originally posted by wormwood
it's not trivial to use them to your advantage.

Ok, maybe our experience differs. I accept that we don't all have the same past.

Here's a game I won recently.



Black played Bd6, and my database showed no games with this move, but yet over 40 games with other moves. This prompted me to consider that there was a drawback to Bd6; why did titled players avoid Bd6?

I had to do some thinking to find lines with my queen attacking the bishop on d6 but it was much easier after the big hint from the database. Maybe I would have found it anyway but my point is that is was made easier with the database.

For me, this was a trivial lookup (in this case, just to see the move wasn't theory) and it definitely helped me gain an advantage (though an engine would have followed up even better).

Originally posted by Willzzz
Quite frankly if a 1200 player makes it to 1400 by using a database is it a big deal?

No. They're a fair 1400 RHP player. But it doesn't mean I'd necessarily respect them as a chess player equally with all other RHP 1400s. For example, I'd be more impressed if they gained 200 points from tactical improvement. That's just a personal opinion of how I rate chess players.

1200's can reach a playable middlegame without being down a piece- that is the advantage of database use. So really they will be getting lessons on opening to middle game transition.

Do that many players actually not use some sort of mco/database etc?

Originally posted by JS357
What do you think of this explanation of how to use a db?

http://tinyurl.com/2v7m4go

A very good basic beginning primer on the use of databases. Greenpawn may be correct that there is a lot left unexplained, techniques used by strong players that differ, and that the author's computer skills are subpar. Even so, the author suggests looking beneath the statistics and going to games by reputable players.

Two points:

1. This sort of database use is a lot of work. It is not a lazy alternative to "using one's brain" as often alleged by newbs in these threads. Using a database in the manner highlighted in the video will slow down your play and limit your game load. (The more careful analysis Greenpawn refers to will require even more effort.)

2. Consistent use of databases in this manner will drive you to study GM games in a way that may well improve your skill. Indeed, such practice has been one of several key components that raised my OTB rating 300 points in the past five years.

I use databases in the manner specified, but I create my own specialized databases. See Kingscrusher's comments in the discussion for some clues to my criteria in self-created dbs.

Originally posted by Varenka
Ok, maybe our experience differs. I accept that we don't all have the same past.

Here's a game I won recently.

[fen]r2qkb1r/pp1n1ppp/2p1pn2/3p1b2/2P5/2NP1NP1/PP2PPBP/R1BQ1RK1[/fen]

Black played Bd6, and my database showed no games with this move, but yet over 40 games with other moves. This prompted me to consider that there was a drawback to Bd6; ...[text shortened]... definitely helped me gain an advantage (though an engine would have followed up even better).

If I may parenthetically add, the rule of thumb in London System/New York Systems is that the king's bishop goes to e2 (or e7) when the other guy fianchettoes, and it goes to d3 (or d6) when he doesn't.

In the above position, putting the bishop on d6 means it is facing white's f2-g3-h2 fortress (insert the "bites on granite" chess cliche here). It would have had better prospects on e7 -or even c5 in some aggressive lines.

Paul

...
Come on lads. Stop being lemmings, realise your full potential.
If you put half the effort you put into being an opening parrot into
developing your game then you would rise above the fog.
...

I have come to the conclusion after some months on RHP that realizing my full chess potential will have to take a back seat to other aspects of my life.