Originally posted by KeplerThat happened to me to some extent. I played exclusively against computer programs for several years, and when I came back to OTB chess two seasons ago I found my style had become too "solid", I was loathe to open positions up because I was used to losing tactically against the programs in such positions.
It is more likely that players who play computers exclusively will pick up bad habits that win against computers but fail against human opposition. I have played such an unfortunate in the past. He was quite upset when I didn't accept a sacrifice that his computer always accepts.
However even though I played against computer programs for a long time, this did not make my moves more computer like, it just made me much less likely to play interesting moves.
I've gradually got used to playing humans again and I even sacrificed material a few times last season!
Originally posted by Northern Ladthey're already tested against pre-computer era CC masters as well.
That's of course a very good point. The only further comment I have is that it would probably make more sense to do the test match-up with IMs/GMs in correspondence chess rather than OTB, i.e. like for like...
and korch, at some point gatecrasher told that they have no backlog of cheaters to investigate, hence they don't need more moderators. it's just that for some of them the "beyond reasonable doubt" takes longer to gather sufficient evidence against.
Saying that making up points lost through playing cheaters will be made up in the long run by playing honest players is flawed. If cheating becomes prevalent, you will never make it up. Besides, just because you earn a salary each week and a twenty dollar bill drops out of your pocket, you don't say, Oh, well I'll make it up in the long run. You're pissed and you turn everything upside down to find it because you've earned it and don't want to lose it. As for people who say that cheating allows you to play against a computer, I have a computer and Fritz but rarely play against it, but when i do play Fritz I know I'm playing it. When i play against a human i like to think i'm playing against a human and not some moron with a chess program.
Originally posted by buddy2no it isn't. any loss or win will have diminishing effect on the current rating change the farther in the past it drifts. which happens because a drop in rating will conversely increase the gain you get from every subsequent win. it's called limited memory in signal processing, and in fact, the rating system would not work without it. there would be no convergence, and the rating would not 'find' your theoretical 'correct' strength, ever.
Saying that making up points lost through playing cheaters will be made up in the long run by playing honest players is flawed.
Originally posted by Fat LadyExactly, it doesn't make you play like a computer but it causes a difference in playing style to cope with the computer. I think the person I mentioned had been playing a rather weak contraption and expected to be able to get away with things that a reasonable player would punish severely.
That happened to me to some extent. I played exclusively against computer programs for several years, and when I came back to OTB chess two seasons ago I found my style had become too "solid", I was loathe to open positions up because I was used to losing tactically against the programs in such positions.
However even though I played against computer pro ...[text shortened]... ally got used to playing humans again and I even sacrificed material a few times last season!
Originally posted by pwnguinPurdy died in 1979 when computer programs were not quite as strong as they are now.
Aren't you allowed to use engines in like postal play? I'm pretty sure masters like Purdy could beat engines in CC because they don't have a move horizon like comps do.