Hi folks,
I have a question that may have already been answered, but I could not find it.
Under the terms of service, I assume that "reference books" includes endgame books. Here's my grey area: Since there are tablebases that have already calculated practically every ending with 6 pieces or less out to definite conclusions with perfect play, doesn't that mean:
1) Every endgame book that includes endings with 6 pieces or less that has been published or reissued recently should have perfect analysis, whether they credit tablebases or not; and
2) Since we probably can't tell where the human analysis ends and the actual tablebase part starts, reference becomes problematic?
I have been using GM Glenn Flear's recent books on endings, and I have been winning even games and drawing bad games because my opponents have been inaccurate in the ending (ending study is part of why I am playing on the site). How much should I be concerned about this?
I suppose this could apply to openings, too (are GMs passing off computer analysis as their own, and do I unknowingly benefit?), but tablebases make the issue of endings a little more concrete.
Thoughts?
Paul Leggett
Originally posted by Paul Leggettendgame tablebases are explicitly prohibited, but all books are explicitly allowed.
Hi folks,
I have a question that may have already been answered, but I could not find it.
Under the terms of service, I assume that "reference books" includes endgame books. Here's my grey area: Since there are tablebases that have already calculated practically every ending with 6 pieces or less out to definite conclusions with perfect play, doe ...[text shortened]... tablebases make the issue of endings a little more concrete.
Thoughts?
Paul Leggett
in theory that would make a printed version of endgame tablebase allowed, in practice printing such a book is not gonna happen.
I'm no endgame boff, but as far as I've seen all endgame books give only principled advice, where the lines aren't forcing. and where forced, it's easy prove it's theory. - a human player will make principled moves, even if they're not optimal. in an ambiguous situation it's usually trivial to recognize human play from tablebase (or engine in general) for that reason.
I wouldn't worry about it.
Thanks for the feedback. I have explicitly avoided using John Nunn's superb rook endings book as a game reference because he clearly states that the whole book was computer-checked. Flear focuses more on generalizations and principles, and his books have been useful and educational for me.
One of my opponents recently implied to me that they thought I was cheating (while we were still in the book portion of our opening, of all places- if he had pushed it, I was just going to copy the GM Kengis game I was following and forward it to him!), so I went back to review the terms of service. I want to be true to the spirit of the rules, and not just technically correct.
That one person was the exception I have encountered. I have played a lot of interesting and friendly people, and I did not consider or anticipate the social aspect of playing like this. If this improves my OTB play like I expect it to, I will have many new friends to thank. Next OTB tournament for me is Oct 24th, and we shall see!
Paul
Originally posted by Paul LeggettI strongly suspect even the nunn book is only checked for blunders, ie against drawing a won position, losing a drawn position etc... the huge errors. not the minor inaccuracies of losing a couple of moves for not cutting corners by some unintuitive and unprincipled maneuvers the tablebase lines contain.
Thanks for the feedback. I have explicitly avoided using John Nunn's superb rook endings book as a game reference because he clearly states that the whole book was computer-checked. Flear focuses more on generalizations and principles, and his books have been useful and educational for me.
One of my opponents recently implied to me that they though ...[text shortened]... e many new friends to thank. Next OTB tournament for me is Oct 24th, and we shall see!
Paul
but I haven't read the book.
everybody gets ridiculous cheating accusations every now and then, it comes with the territory. think nothing of them. people simply tend to get paranoid when they can't see the opponent face to face making moves.
- Joined
- 20 Jan 07
- Moves
- 24603
Originally posted by wormwoodThis may become more of an issue, the more comprehensive that endings books become. I don't have a copy but i'm led to believe that the very comprehensive Fundamental Chess Endings contains many positions calculated to a finish with the aid of endgame Table bases.
endgame tablebases are explicitly prohibited, but all books are explicitly allowed.
in theory that would make a printed version of endgame tablebase allowed, in practice printing such a book is not gonna happen.
I'm no endgame boff, but as far as I've seen all endgame books give only principled advice, where the lines aren't forcing. and where forced, ...[text shortened]... lay from tablebase (or engine in general) for that reason.
I wouldn't worry about it.
Does this mean that if you have such a position arise in a game and follow the book to get a win that you have cheated?
A very grey area i'd say.
Originally posted by TalismanThat's exactly why I am concerned about staying true to the intent of the site.
This may become more of an issue, the more comprehensive that endings books become. I don't have a copy but i'm led to believe that the very comprehensive Fundamental Chess Endings contains many positions calculated to a finish with the aid of endgame Table bases.
Does this mean that if you have such a position arise in a game and follow the book to get a win that you have cheated?
A very grey area i'd say.
When you get the chance, can you go forward in time and tell us how the issue ultimately gets resolved? Inquiring minds want to know! 😀
Paul
AS I understand it, all the major endgame books published in the past several years have been checked with tablebases. This checking is certainly true of Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual and Fundamental Chess Endings by Muller and Lamprecht.
Either you can use these books (my assumption) or you must never look at them as long as you have a game going on RHP.