Originally posted by Northern Lad
I was amazed that, on the first opportunity (move 63), Meman voluntarily gave up the exchange, leading to the endgame Q + 2P (a+b) v Q whose assessment had been changed by the advent of the silicon monsters. Meman's engine preferred to defend an endgame it 'knew' to be a draw. No human player would dream of playing like that, since the techical draw that computers have found in this endgame requires only moves at a number of critical stages.
Yes, his games, as well as those of jimster, EddieT, and GauravV exemplify what I would call “retarded chess.”
The substantial number of engine users prevalent in correspondence chess greatly taints the reputation of the game, and additionally casts doubt on players such as you who play the game legitimately. I suppose there is still hope that correspondence chess here will become more engine-free as this site prohibits engine use, and enforces the policy well.
I suspect many stronger players are unwilling to play CC due to fear of playing engines when they play one of the top players or fear of being accused of being one. Of course there are some legitimate top players, but based on my own experience, I think that their fear of potentially facing an engine is substantiated.
The reality is that anybody, even one with an elementary understanding of chess, may find the best moves with the aid of an engine. While wonderful for postgame analysis, this sucks for CC. However, a single game may be an indicator of engine use as you have just demonstrated.
I think it would be nice if higher rated players would thoroughly annotate a few of their games in the forums, explaining why one line is superior to another, and what would be even better, illuminating the entire thought process on how they arrived at the move they played.
Something like this:
http://www.towardsfreedom.com/veggiechess/games.html
This suggestion has been made before, but there is no incentive for a higher rated player to do this. So create an incentive. Perhaps create a forum for annotated games? Or create a sponsored tournament in which players who provide annotations to their games and answer questions regarding positions in that game are pooled into a lottery in which a player wins a free/reduced cost subscription?
I think the benefits would really outweigh the costs.
There would be so many benefits to this:
It would improve the quality of the chess forum, generating discussion regarding chess ideas.
The less-skilled players learn.
The engine users may become evident.
Plus stronger players may be attracted to the chess forums, and most essentially, players may be drawn to the site. (More money for Chris and Russ. 😉 ) One may tell much about the quality of a site based on the quality of the forums. This would a be a good way to be a step ahead of the competition.