Analysis Board

I seldom use the Analysis Board in my games. The times I have used the feature were games that I lost, no fault of the Analysis Board ; I was just outplayed.

I can see how the Analysis Board can be a benefit yet I don't want it to hinder what growth I may be having in calculating without it.

Yeah I was once involved with a group who, as part of their policy, they didn't use it at all.  They believed that in using it, it was cheating, because in an across the board game with a live opponent you didn't have anything like that at your disposal so why should you here.  I agree with that philosophy somewhat, I don't think it is cheating, but at the same time it isn't traditional chess as you would play at the club or at the table.  

It's a nice aide to get clarity for En pass-ant when a player is not sure of that move. Since the source is available for all the players as a part of the game in Correspondence chess it wouldn't bother me if my opponent was using the analysis board . It's only good for me if it helps me to improve in chess.

I think the operative phrase is "Correspondence Chess". 

Correspondence chess has a unique history of allowing that which we would not normally do in a regular game.  Was it, perhaps, because it was not possible to enforce a rule not to physically move pieces around on a board, or refer to a book, that a rule was made to allow it?  Anyway, as you know, the analysis board is simply an online way of moving the pieces around on a board, as you would be allowed to do in correspondence chess.  As I understand it, online "turn-based chess" is considered to be the same as "correspondences chess".

One past contributor in a chess.com forum on this subject explained that the analysis board does not allow you to move into check, thereby helping you to be aware of that, and it was therefore a help that would not be allowed even in correspondence chess.

Wow! I hadn't thought of that!

Then, much later, I noticed that a check box had been added to the analysis board to check or uncheck "legal moves".  Hmmmmmmmmm....

My feeling is that as long as both players have equal access to the features, then it's fair.

The much bigger problem, in my mind, is the varying size and quality of individuals' chess libraries.  What are we going to do about that?!.........lol...

I personally don't see an issue with that either.  I don't personally own any chess libraries and don't use outside chess analysis programs.  But as I see it, we learn by assimilation, that is we take someone else's ideas and incorporate them into our own.  Then as we grow, we branch off and are able to come up with our own ideas.  In this way, I think the use of such materials can be a good thing for the player.  It may not seem fair to the other player, but lets face it, we are all here to enjoy a game and test our mental strength and strategy, this isn't a real chess tournament.  Just because a player chooses to use, lets say a library, to find the best answer to a position presented to him/her, it may open their eyes to a new possibility and therefore it is learned and hopefully retained.  Now as for the people who use these things solely to win, or cheat if you will, well they are only hurting themselves.  My suggestion for that kind of behavior, should you suspect it, is don't play that person again, unless you enjoy playing a computer to test yourself.  We all do the best we can with what we have available to us.  I think getting caught up in worrying if the other person is cheating or not only serves to obstruct our own flow, like a boulder landing in a free flowing stream.  But if you let that boulder keep rolling by then your stream continues to flow freely.

Just a thought.

That's a great thought! 

About the analysis programs, although they're not allowed during a game, they are essential for finding out why we lost a game and adding to our knowledge and skill.  For example, if we notice that we are losing games because of a recurring tactical oversight involving a pin, we can use that information to make a special effort to work on tactical problems on the theme of pins.  The uses of the analysis program can be virtually unlimited (without engaging in cheating, I might add).

Of course, I think we all know that databases, like chessbase, and our chess libraries, can be used in online turn-based chess (as here at chess.com) as well as "correspondence chess".  This is a great method for melding play and study (as you mentioned above, Todd), something not possible in OTB play. One thing I don't know is, are we allowed by chess.com rules to use a database to help with a vote game and share the data in the team comments?

By the way, I noticed a friend of mine, "emulenga", was playing someone who was identified as a cheater and the offending account was closed.  So I asked emulenga if he knew the other player was cheating.  He said that he didn't know, and that it didn't make any difference to him.  He said he was interested in learning from the game, and he took the finished game to his chess club to analyze with his friends and find out why he lost so he could improve (and I would bet he uses post-mortem computer analysis as well).  Talk about not letting a boulder block your stream!  There's the gold standard!

Todd, if you don't yet have any chess books, you are missing out on some enjoyment of chess, if I may say so.  (I've been collecting them since 1969, want any recommendations?)

Cheers