I do consult databases and opening books.

now and then you can see in RHP players' profiles that they 'consult databases and opening books (which is allowed by RHP's ToS). While I understand the latter (for I sometimes use it too), I don't quite get what 'consulting database' means, does it give any advantage to my opponent? does it, say, mean that in some situation he or she may opt for a move some GMs had played etc.?

Originally posted by Renars
now and then you can see in RHP players' profiles that they 'consult databases and opening books (which is allowed by RHP's ToS). While I understand the latter (for I sometimes use it too), I don't quite get what 'consulting database' means, does it give any advantage to my opponent? does it, say, mean that in some situation he or she may opt for a move some GMs had played etc.?

Database = collection of games. So yes, if they find a GM game with the same position, they can copy the GM's moves. As for gaining an advantage - it depends on whether they understand the ideas behind the GM moves well enough to know what to do if the opponent diverges from the game line.

Originally posted by SwissGambit
Database = collection of games. So yes, if they find a GM game with the same position, they can copy the GM's moves. As for gaining an advantage - it depends on whether they understand the ideas behind the GM moves well enough to know what to do if the opponent diverges from the game line.

I usually don't understand what's going on in the openings, especially at the moment, I certainly don't understand the ideas behind GM moves because my current openings are very unfamiliar to me.

I used to have nice and small 1.c4 repertuare, where now I have switched to 1.d4 and the material is like 50x larger, I used to play narrow lines of french and now I play the petrov against 1.e4, they are two completely different worlds.

I even have to have something against that stupid KG, it's just a nuts opening. Anyways, I played two KG games after switching as black, and I was absolutely clueless, but got into very favorable positions (probably winning) with the help of my databases. Databases are especially helpful if your opponent goes for a little dubious but complicated openings, they may be very hard to refute on your own, but with databases, it's not such a big problem as it would be OTB.

So when I'm out of book, I'm like a fish out of water. But I still believe databases give me a serious advantage if my opponent doesn't use any, with everything else being equal.

with a database you can do searches for certain types of maneuvers, material imbalances etc. You can look at games that are synonymous strategically but are not in the same opening line (like search by pawn structures etc.)

One of the more fun things to do, is to dig up a line that resulted unfavorably for your side, but in the post mortem a winning line was found for your side. Sometimes your opponent will see that the outcome of the line you are following ended in their favor and be in for a surprise when you uncork the improvement. This is where annotated games can be really handy.

Originally posted by philidor position
Databases are especially helpful if your opponent goes for a little dubious but complicated openings, they may be very hard to refute on your own, but with databases, it's not such a big problem as it would be OTB.

...but this implies or actually suggests that consulting databases does give you an advantage (provided you know how to use them)

It evens out the disadvantage of your opponent using one 😛

Originally posted by Renars
...but this implies or actually suggests that consulting databases does give you an advantage (provided you know how to use them)

It doesn't just imply it. Utilizing opening books and databases will increase your
ability to find + positions.

As long as your confident in those positions, you'll be able to convert more wins when
utilizing these tools. The more time and tools you use on each move, the better your
play should be.


-GIN

Originally posted by Nowakowski
The more time and tools you use on each move, the better your
play should be.


-GIN

Just one should be sufficient for most though 😉

A warning.

Don't mindlessly follow a database/bookline like I did in a current game.Like me,you might end up with a position you don't really want and have no clue how to play.

You'll feel plain stupid,believe me

Originally posted by heinzkat
Just one should be sufficient for most though 😉

1. Analysis Board
2. Opening Books
3. Database (maybe more than one...depending on your organizational pref's)
4. Live Board (especially for tougher games)


I hope every player I face uses all of the above.

Originally posted by Ajuin
A warning.

Don't mindlessly follow a database... <zip zap>

well, I don't as simply don't have one nor do I know how to use one... was just wondering really, probably also why is it being permitted..

Databases and books are the reason for playing correspondence chess.

I consider the best way to learn openings is by playing cc games.
when I transition into more otb I will have had experience in tons of gm lines before.. who would pass that up?

Originally posted by Renars
now and then you can see in RHP players' profiles that they 'consult databases and opening books (which is allowed by RHP's ToS). While I understand the latter (for I sometimes use it too), I don't quite get what 'consulting database' means, does it give any advantage to my opponent? does it, say, mean that in some situation he or she may opt for a move some GMs had played etc.?

Here's a great example of how a database statistic can be misleading.

You see a move in the database that has been played 100 times, with a winning percentage of 99%.

The stat idiot looks at it and says "Wow, it wins 99% of the time, it must be great!"

The stat guru checks it a little more, and learns that the move won in the first 99 games, until GM X found a crushing refutation, which he played in game 100 and won convincingly. Other GMs saw the game, and gave up the original move entirely, so it never gets played again.

The move remains in the database, with it's "beautiful" 99% success rate, just waiting for the next amateur victim to blindly follow a stat and play it.

Paul

I think using references in CC is over-rated when the player's main goal is to improve their OTB playing ability.

- playing opponents who are testing your opening play by continuously choosing GM moves from a database is a different test than your typical 1800 club player will throw at you in an OTB game

- for OTB play, we must learn to think for ourselves and solve opening problems by ourselves. This is an important skill that CC avoids much more in comparison to OTB. Instead we learn how to check statistics, etc.

- in OTB, many moves have good practical chances at club level even if GMs (and only GMs) have the ability to refute them. So "best by test" is not directly comparable from CC to OTB

- I acknowledge that many people have learnt openings via CC play. But is it really the most effective approach? How long would it have taken if they'd just studied the opening directly? Let's face it, I can look at my database and pretend I have an opponent trying some of the moves against me without needing a game in progress. I've yet to hear an OTB GM suggesting that CC play is the best way to study the opening

- without any proof to back it up, I guess that most players develop some laziness while using references for CC. They will claim that each and every move is well understood, with example games being studied prior to the move being played, etc. That's the ideal. Maybe the reality involves a bit more "click, click, click... database suggests X... I'll move X...". Or maybe their "understanding" amounts to "yes, it develops a piece... I understand it" even although 3 other moves also "develop a piece".