Originally posted by arrakisHey man,you can't volunteer twice 😉😛
Starrman
Lucifershammer
Paultopia
NicolaiS
ouroboros
David Tebb
Grayeyesofsorrow
tejo
trekkie
Mephisto2
mrmist
Marinakatomb
TimmyToilet
TRACKHEAD21
Crowley
chess kid1
Ragnorak
cbd
TheMaster37
SirUlrich
SteveC
arrakis
Phlabibit
rapalla7
Gatecrasher
Cheshire Cat
SirLoseALot
Zumdahl
Arrakis
- Joined
- 05 Aug 04
- Moves
- 220343
Russ - Can you message all users? If so why not let everyone know that this is going to happen and 'program users' will be caught and expelled.
However, if before this starts up any registered users wishing to confess will be allowed to continue on the site provided they agree to never use this assistance again. You may save the cheat police a lot of time.
Also, are partitial program users going to be looked in to? Some seem to use programs to get a good lead and then mid game stop using the program. I have been hammered early on and then come back to win or draw during end game.
Also, once the dust has settled why not instigate spot checks. Kind of like a random drug test.
People will always try and get round any safe guards that are in place but if they know that any game can be looked at then they will think twice.
Finally, those that have put their names forward to form the cheat police should write a short note with their experience and expertise to give those voting something to go on. There are a lot of programs out there so I think a team will be required specialising in the various programs.
Good luck with this venture.
Originally posted by RagnorakSounds good to me, and I am sure there are some who would not want this....
Another good tool would be for the cheat police to be able to see a graph of all of a user's games, not just the last 300. This would help investigate cheats like Tlaimaster who played to a certain level for hundreds of games, and then shot up.
D
P-
- Joined
- 20 Feb 02
- Moves
- 58336
Originally posted by Grandmaster baterNot wanting to anger the death squads here on anything, but just to point out on this matter that many people on RHP use databases such as:
Also, are partitial program users going to be looked in to? Some seem to use programs to get a good lead and then mid game stop using the program. I have been hammered early on and then come back to win or draw during end game.
Also, once the dust has settled why not instigate spot checks. Kind of like a random drug test.
For openings...
http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~amos/chess/Start.html
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/explorer
or more advanced databases such as...
http://www.chesslab.com/PositionSearch.html
http://www.chesslive.de/
Which could explain many games slide in quality as you approach midgame and move away from lines featured.
Also, in correspondance chess there are many here who do look into end game theory in either books or web pages. i.e.
http://www.chessville.com/instruction/Center_Squares/K_v_KBandRP.htm
Also, some players use correspondence chess to play with particular openings or gambits and try them out in games with sometimes startling results. i.e.
http://www.chessville.com/instruction/Openings/Halloween_Gambit/Part_1.htm
So I think is is unfair to suspect everyone. As has been pointed out by many here, a focus on where specific complaints have been made and where players have had a sudden rise in form (especially where this form has come in a particular tournament, or just in clan games).
Andrew
Dear sir!!
I'm a corrispondence ICCF chess master.
When I played in 1980 years with mail all and I make incredible blunder!!
In this site the top player never leave one piece in capture in two moves, if you analyse their games with Fritz 8 or Junior 8 you can see that they play always the first move of a software!!!
so I'm sure that ALL the top players use computer for his home analysis, but this is no a problems!!!
The problems are all people that don't admit that they aren't good engines user!!!!!!!! because a lot of players 80% or + with more than 1600 ELO points use pc.
When I have a inferior position I'm sure that I lose the game with high probability because the man is superior to the engines in only a little type of positions: exemple some variation of Leningrad Dutch A89 or Bird Leningrad attack.
So I give you a revolutionary idea.
Stop the question and say " Ok All use the PC if one enjoy it " and this is a site of "advanced chess" man a machine together.
If all players use engines the top player rating don't change because
the actual situation is pc + man.
The top players of RHP play like strong IM or better but between us there aren't IM or GM so the only true is "ALL use PC"
Stop the hypocrisy!!!!!!!!!!
Same think in Gameknot of course!
You'ld be the first that stop the hypocrisy.
Bye Russ
Precisation!
It's possible that all the top 100 players are really so very strong and don't use Engines or PC.
But I cann't believe that of course if it's so !! they MUST become professionist and GOOD FORTUNE. hi hi hi !!!
A last word, we a player use the engines against my I'm happy because the game is more interesting.
Bye
Originally posted by El BrutoThese are some very good points we've been over before. Very few want this site to allow computer use so we have to have some effort to stop it even if it is impossible to eradicate.
Precisation!
It's possible that all the top 100 players are really so very strong and don't use Engines or PC.
But I cann't believe that of course if it's so !! they MUST become professionist and GOOD FORTUNE. hi hi hi !!!
A last word, we a player use the engines against my I'm happy because the game is more interesting.
Bye
I WOULD BE VERY HAPPY IF NOBODY USE ENGINES, but
I think that stop computer user is impossible and never we can be sure that a player use engines for accuse him with 100% certainty.!!
He may be really a strong player .... a professionist ....a IM or GM
so .....the question: are the weak players able to judge a GM or IM comprension of chess.....
I don't believe it's possible.
So it's better that all stop the discussion about Engines use.
Originally posted by El BrutoEl, you need to go and read the 40 odd pages of forums on these topics. Everything you have asked is covered somewhere.
I WOULD BE VERY HAPPY IF NOBODY USE ENGINES, but
I think that stop computer user is impossible and never we can be sure that a player use engines for accuse him with 100% certainty.!!
He may be really a strong player .... a professionist ....a IM or GM
so .....the question: are the weak players able to judge a GM or IM comprension of chess.....
I don't believe it's possible.
So it's better that all stop the discussion about Engines use.
- Joined
- 05 Aug 04
- Moves
- 220343
I want to play chess with people not programs. If I wanted to play a Program I would buy one. Anyone, and I mean anyone that uses Computer assistance in the form of a program is not only cheating those that they play they are fooling themselves into believing they are better than they really are.
If you sat down at a table to play someone you would not parked a PC next to you, would you? You may as well plonk it in front of your opponent go down the pub and ask him to give you a ring when he has lost.
Programs analyze a board in such a way that human error is eliminated. As is the ability to bounce back after an error. That's why those of us that don't use and play by THE RULES are fed up with this. It's the equivilent of being on performancing enhancing drugs........And no i'm not!
If you just want to get the highest score then go and play a shoot em up in an arcade!
Originally posted by El Bruto
Dear sir!!
I'm a corrispondence ICCF chess master.
When I played in 1980 years with mail all and I make incredible blunder!!
In this site the top player never leave one piece in capture in two moves, if you analyse their games with Fritz 8 or Junior 8 you can see that they play always the first move of a software!!!
so I'm sure that ALL the top player ...[text shortened]... !!!!
Same think in Gameknot of course!
You'ld be the first that stop the hypocrisy.
Bye Russ
I totally agree...
And I add my 2 cents (nor mine, taken from a web page 😳 ):
<begin of quote>
Autor: Ethical cheating artist (62.234.50.---)
Datum: 25.01.2004 22:08
When asked if using computers in online chess is "inherently unethical" many consider it so. Users of computers are labeled "cheaters." Many competitors mention that they would personally gain no satisfaction from winning if they used computer assistance. Many also equated using computers to letting the computer totally generate the moves without any involvement from the player. Using computers has been labeled by many as unethical and unsatisfying without any further thought about more subtle and creative uses of using analyzing computers as tools.
When assistance of computers to analyze positions is forbidden by the rules of play some difficulties arise. First of all is done properly computer aided play in online chess cannot be detected. Additionally there are all sorts of minor infractions that can occur with computer use. How about using a computer to study openings, say by using it as a practice opponent or allowing it to suggest lines of play for you to consider, when would you have to stop playing these lines ? If you consider this example trivial allow me to point out that such considerations have led to lengthy and heated debate already.
Here are my personal opinions on this subject. I see nothing "inherently" unethical about using computers. They are just one additional tool we can use to determine the move we wish to make. I wouldn't obtain personal satisfaction from plugging my positions into a computer and just accepting the generated moves but I'll allow that it is possible that some competitors would find this a fun way to play chess. There will always be competitors who want to play without computer assistance. I have no problem with that as long as they respect my perception too!
Chess is a magnificent activity. The art/sport/science of chess is great enough to encompass all competitors, whether they pursue correspondence, OTB, problem solving/composing, chess set collecting, chess-on-stamps collecting, chess forms designing, chess journalism, tournament directing, organizing, or the many other forms of chess activities. It would be grossly unfair for one set of chess enthusiasts to prohibit others from pursuing their preferred forms of the game. I would specifically propose chess competitions be made available for using computers to analyze or generate moves. I see no reason to satisfy those who are opposed to these ideas : I refuse to accept the tyranny of those who would force others to play only by their preferred rules.
<end of quote>
-J