Thanks for the heads-up. I don't use databases anyway, but is this one illegal because it shows the complete games?
Database.
Sort:
Dec 7, 2009
0
#3
No it is illegal because see on the link I posted here? It says evaluation? That right there unbeknown to me till yesterday this is in fact scores from computer analysis.
Ah I see.. So databases that show entire games are legal?
Dec 7, 2009
0
#5
Lol that is not a question for me to answer that is for chess.com. I can say that opening databases are fine though
Well you use them, so I thought you'd know 
To be honest, I agree with the use of opening databases as they aid in learning to use the many openings out there. Full game databases on the other hand, I don't know... Seems like poor form to me. It could be argued that they are simply an extension to opening databases I guess.
Dec 7, 2009
0
#8
Yes I occasionally use opening databases but just to find the best way through an opening I mean most if not all my games go out of book at some point but I am just trying to learn.
Yeah Donna I agree entirely. I don't see any harm of using openings databases with book openings and nothing more. I don't agree with the use of databases that go beyond this though - databases that go out of book and into the middle game - even though they appear to be within the rules... Unless I'm mistaken.
do you know how impossibly hard it is to follow databases after a point? unless you are using a very specific opening or your opponent is using the same db, you will diverge at some point. studying and using high level games is a good way to learn, but if you can follow them past the opening/ beginning of middle game/ something very off has occured
I have used opening databases for almost ALL of my online games, and I have NEVER followed a database line all the way thru to the end of the game. At some point, one of the players ALWAYS goes out of book.
Interesting. So when people post that database in a vote chess game I should tell them it's illegal?
A related question: My girlfriend gave me this link and I uploaded some of my completed games to this site http://www.masterchessgames.com/index.php?main=ECO-Calculator-Submit-Chess-Games to see what the ECO was. After I did that, I looked around the site a bit. Apparently, they keep all games uploaded to them and put them in a database. When I looked to see if my games I uploaded were in there, I saw a lot of games with funny names like comp1 vs. comp2 or whatever. Apparently people upload computer games to that site to see what the ECO is perhaps. Does that site then put those computer games in their database that can be accessed at http://www.masterchessgames.com/Chess-Openings-Explorer.htm ? It appears to me like they do. I have never seen anyone post that database in a vote chess game anyway though and if that database contains any and all games anyone cares to upload it, wouldn't that database be essentially worthless? Or at least worthless to use for the purpose of actually choosing moves. Seems like only masters' games databases like chess.com are worthwhile to look at. But if someone would actually be crazy enough to use that database at http://www.masterchessgames.com/Chess-Openings-Explorer.htm, is that cheating since it contains games people played with computers?
On the side topic of how long a database lasts, I've only used the chess.com one, but I've never played a game where there was anything in the data base after move 11.
The chess.com database only uses masters' games.
Dec 22, 2009
0
#14
Yes but the database which I sometimes use on gameknot that isn't just masters games.
Panmumu wrote:
all the opening data bases are compermised because they all contain material from computer games
The statement I made above: "The chess.com database only uses masters games" disproves Panmumu's statement "all the opening databases are compermised (sic) because they all contain material from computer games" as it only takes one counter example to prove a conjecture false. I.e., it is not true that all the opening databases are compermised (sic) because they all contain material from computer games as there exists at least one database that does not contain material from computer games: chess.com's masters database.
Why would anyone who has access to a database of well over 2.5 million masters games use a database that contains non-masters games? Who knows what manner of goofy blunder laden games are in such databases? One might as well flip a coin. If the data are rubbish, the conclusions drawn from the data are rubbish. Using such databases is pure folly; they are not to be trusted.
Panmumu wrote:
if you and your oppo are in ''book'' after move 20 both of you are using a database of some sort, if your rating is not 2000+ ELO OTB and and your in ''book'' after 10 moves something is wrong. Bigger yet are the ''people'' who go out of book with an over-whelming advantage 5 moves later, yet your database did not show the move and it is not in play OTB anywhere in the world.
2 points:
What do the terms "in book" and "out of book" even mean? The term "book moves" are defined as a sequence of opening moves considered standard, as cataloged in a reference work such as the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings. There are no sequences of opening moves considered standard (i.e., ones with an ECO code) that come even close to 10 moves long, so there are certainly no book moves after move 10 or 20. The only moves that are "book moves" are the specific, well defined openings and defenses. I see people discussing so called "book moves" all the time that are not part of any ECO code sequence of moves. It seems it has become common practice to incorrectly use the term "book move" to mean a move that is in whatever database the person using the term is looking at. That is simply wrong. "Book moves" are the very specific, definitive moves of a given opening or defense and that is all. Any moves beyond those defined in the ECO are not "book moves." Moves being in some database does not of itself make them "book moves."
As for the "people who go out of book with an overwhelming advantage 5 moves later," lately, when playing another chess.com premium member who is obviously choosing moves from the chess.com masters database, I have been experimenting with deviating from the database as soon as possible in an attempt to deny my opponent the use of a database. Sometimes this works, more often it doesn't. But when it does work I usually have a definite advantage after 5 moves or so. That in itself is certainly no metric to use to flag cheating. It is in fact, in some cases, good strategy - it forces one's opponent to actually play and not blindly follow moves in a database. Other times it's bad strategy and I get my ass whooped. LOL. I'm still experimenting with doing that. :P
My apologies, Panmumu, I am by no means intending to single you out or attack you personally in any way; you just happened to bring up several misnomers that It seems most people use all the time and I have been wanting to address them somewhere. I guess that somewhere turned out to be here. :P
@ MuzeY; The rules of correspondence chess, which is what we play here, have always allowed forms of assistance such as books and databases. I don't understand what point you are trying to make about "full game databases." What are we discussing if not databases of chess games? They wouldn't be databases otherwise; what would the data be? And like Billium said, all games deviate very quickly from any such databases. The most moves I have ever played in a game that were still in the chess.com masters database is 11 moves, and that was once. Typically there are no moves in the database well before move 8. IMHO the "full games" aspect is never an issue - what 2 people would make the same moves in the same game in a database, knowing that either white or black won? No one would continue to make the same moves as an historical game knowing that the moves they are making resulted in a loss. Even correspondence chess players who heavily rely on databases very quickly run out of database moves; it's not an issue.
The article in Wikipedia on correspondence chess is informative: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correspondence_chess
I'm surprised that it says that chess programs are sometimes allowed in correspondence chess. Now THAT is just wrong. In such a scenario, 2 players could simply be relaying moves form some chess program to each other. They might as well not even play, just let the chess program run.
Mike, While I agree with just about everything you said, I have a couple points of clarification:
1) There is at least 1 opening in the ECO that is 10 moves long: The Frankenstein-Dracula Variation in the Vienna Game (the actual Frankenstein-Dracula position is at move 10). I'm sure I've seen others (the Sicilian Najdorf: Ivkov Variation goes to move 12), but you're right that most of them have moves which can be counted on one hand.
2) I'll admit that I have used "out of book" when a database runs out of moves, and this is probably not entirely accurate by the strictest definition, but "party" never used to be a verb either.
3) Not all databases have the complete games in them. I refer to a dozen of them, and some literally only save the first 6 or 12 moves. And there have been times that I wished that they DID include non-master games sometimes, cuz I rarely play masters, and I want to know how to take advantage of the non-master move that my opponent just made. Of course, the winning percentages mean nothing if you include games where people can make horrible blunders and still win.
4) Finally, I agree that most games lose all database assitance before you're into double digits, but I have my favorite line of the Alekhine Defense worked out to move 16, and I program it in as conditional moves quite often. Only once has someone followed my conditional moves all the way to move 16, but it does happen. I think I was "in book" (using the online database definition) in a Ruy Lopez game to move 22 or 23, something like that. Doesn't usually happen, but it can.
Interesting, Billium I didn't know just about all of that. The Frankenstein-Dracula Variation in the Vienna Game? I have to look that up1 LOL
Dang, here is a PDF file on it: http://www.chesscafe.com/text/kibitz01.pdf
I just hosted a tournament from the Frankenstein-Dracula position:
http://www.chess.com/tournament/trilogy-of-terror-dracula-vs-frankenstein
Now I know that a lot of the members in this group are using this particular database thinking it is OK to use but last night I was accused of cheating for using it.
http://chessok.com/?page_id=352
I have been chatting with members of chess.com staff over the course of the day and it has now been established that to use this particular database IS cheating.
Opening databases are fine and are perfectly alright to use but this particular database also uses computer analysis so must therefore not be used.
Thank you for your time.