- Joined
- 03 Sep 03
- Moves
- 87628
09 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by theblackprawnyes and advisable.
on one persons profile they stated that they use opening books ...is this acceptable?
This is a correspondence chess site.
See here for more info:
http://www.chessatwork.com/myhome/termsofservice.php
(b) While a game is in progress you may not refer to chess engines, chess computers or be assisted by a third party. Endgame tablebases may not be consulted during play but you may reference books, databases consisting of previously played games between human players, and other pre-existing research materials.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
09 Jan 11
Originally posted by tmetzlerI think it is advisable to use opening books for a while, say, for a tournament or two, and then enter a tournament without using opening books, or without using them past, say, move 6. This is a way to see if you are really absorbing anything.
yes and advisable.
This is a correspondence chess site.
See here for more info:
http://www.chessatwork.com/myhome/termsofservice.php
(b) While a game is in progress you may not refer to chess engines, chess computers or be assisted by a third party. Endgame tablebases may not be consulted during play [b]but you may reference books, databases consist ...[text shortened]... f previously played games between human players, and other pre-existing research materials. [/b]
09 Jan 11
"...and other pre-existing research materials"
This is a can of worms. I've had more than one opponent in here claim, when I've privately raised the matter of engine-use, that their moves reflect Fritz/Rybka/whatever because they are following their voluminous 'research' notes based on analysis of earlier games - private and unpublished notes of course.
10 Jan 11
Originally posted by atticus2I think they are having trouble thinking they should be playing as if they are in an OTB tourny. They don't know the difference apparently.
[b]"...and other pre-existing research materials"
This is a can of worms. I've had more than one opponent in here claim, when I've privately raised the matter of engine-use, that their moves reflect Fritz/Rybka/whatever because they are following their voluminous 'research' notes based on analysis of earlier games - private and unpublished notes of course.[/b]
10 Jan 11
Originally posted by atticus2There goes my idea for 1.b3 Fritz and Me.
[b]"...and other pre-existing research materials"
This is a can of worms. I've had more than one opponent in here claim, when I've privately raised the matter of engine-use, that their moves reflect Fritz/Rybka/whatever because they are following their voluminous 'research' notes based on analysis of earlier games - private and unpublished notes of course.[/b]
12 Jan 11
Originally posted by EladarHehehe.
There goes my idea for 1.b3 Fritz and Me.
What is funny is that my 'pre-existing research materials' are all the games I have played previously, written on the back of envelopes or napkins. I enjoy playing 1. f4 because of GM Henrik Danielsens excellent youtube series on "The Polar Bear System" and how it can lead to very interesting variations and very sharp lines.
I like sharp lines because I am too stupid to work through open positions. Or endgames. Or openings.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
12 Jan 11
Originally posted by TiwakingGood for you but BS on your using the back of envlopes or napkins.
Hehehe.
What is funny is that my 'pre-existing research materials' are all the games I have played previously, written on the back of envelopes or napkins. I enjoy playing 1. f4 because of GM Henrik Danielsens excellent youtube series on "The Polar Bear System" and how it can lead to very interesting variations and very sharp lines.
I like sharp lines because I am too stupid to work through open positions. Or endgames. Or openings.
12 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by JS357Would you like me to take a picture?
Good for you but BS on your using the back of envlopes or napkins.
The entire Tiwaking vs Wii: Elephant Opening (see youtube video) was handwritten on the back of envelopes containing bank statements. There are half a dozen of them with scrawls all over them. Tiny tiny writing.
It makes them very hard to find what works, but oh so rewarding when you do!
I am a bit spastic like that.
edit: And I mainly meant for OTB games as I record them on whatever is lying around at the time. For RedHotPawn games I reset the board to the start and play through every single move until the position is reached again, just to keep focused.
12 Jan 11
Originally posted by tmetzlerI am thinking this may cause some grief. Just about any commercial database (ChessBase HUUUUUGE DB or whatever they call it) will contain some games involving computer input. Anything claiming some kind of association with correspondence chess (Ultracorr for instance) must be doubly dubious.
databases consisting of previously played games between human players
Anyone ever claimed they were wrongly banned because the "system" picked up on his database of computer games?
12 Jan 11
Originally posted by Tiwakingawesome video and some good commentary as well, i really enjoyed that. Having only ever won one game against a computer in my life (linux chess program on easy mode) there is something sweet about beating the silicone beast!
Would you like me to take a picture?
The entire Tiwaking vs Wii: Elephant Opening (see youtube video) was handwritten on the back of envelopes containing bank statements. There are half a dozen of them with scrawls all over them. Tiny tiny writing.
It makes them very hard to find what works, but oh so rewarding when you do!
I am a bit spastic like ...[text shortened]... rt and play through every single move until the position is reached again, just to keep focused.
12 Jan 11
Originally posted by DiophantusI am using a database of something like 7 million games plus a couple other databases of portal games (mostly garbage..) etc and I can tell you that in a lot of fairly mundane positions you can get to a very small number of games pretty quickly.
I am thinking this may cause some grief. Just about any commercial database (ChessBase HUUUUUGE DB or whatever they call it) will contain some games involving computer input. Anything claiming some kind of association with correspondence chess (Ultracorr for instance) must be doubly dubious.
Anyone ever claimed they were wrongly banned because the "system" picked up on his database of computer games?
All it takes is a couple passive, marginal moves to find yourself in new territory.
A great example is in the Exchange QGD- in my database (which is a hybrid of CB mega2008, Opening master, mega Corr, and a ton of portal CC games- which begs the question if using top games from say Gameknot with all their engine users should be legal.)
you drop from something like 40,000 games to 14 from move 6 to move 11 in a line that is played frequently by sub 2300's. Now even if I analyze this deeply at move 11.. what are the odds at move 21 I will still be in my analysis?
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
14 Jan 11
Originally posted by nimzo5I see you have won some tournaments. Have you entered any tournaments without using opening databases? Won any of them? No harm intended, I'm just curious as to whether using dbs results in better play when not using them. I've relied on them too, although less frequently recently. Or is it that we as chess fans should just get over the idea that chess without using dbs is somehow more legitimate and is the true test of skill?
I am using a database of something like 7 million games plus a couple other databases of portal games (mostly garbage..) etc and I can tell you that in a lot of fairly mundane positions you can get to a very small number of games pretty quickly.
All it takes is a couple passive, marginal moves to find yourself in new territory.
A great example is in the ...[text shortened]... I analyze this deeply at move 11.. what are the odds at move 21 I will still be in my analysis?