Chess databases, why no easy way to access it from the game?

You obviously have no idea what you're talking about.  Databases are, and have always been, an important part of corespondence chess, and the best CC players use them a lot.

Not-an-easy-access to databases is a good thing - I am talking regarding a particular category players in chess.com

(1) they have gazillions of game running simul

(2) they ignore conditional moves even if you give them to save time

(3) they take the maximum possible time permitted - if it is 5 days/move game, they will take 4-5 days/move - period. They won't giv etheir moves early.

(4) They regularly use databases - if database access was so easy they will run thousands of games

(5) if you go through their games, maximum wins are due to opponents abandoning games out of sheer boredom - i.e., out of time, maximum draws are through agreement (I have offered a draw because I want to get out of the game! 3 months only 19 moves - conditionals totally ignored) - take maximum vacations allowed (thrice on a single game - commenting out of boredom!!!)

(6) they are usually premium members, so no action is possible against them.

Conclusion: database access should be as difficult as possible!!!

A wise man once said "You obviously have no idea what you're talking about.  Databases are, and have always been, an important part of corespondence chess, and the best CC players use them a lot."

How on earth does one "ignore" conditional moves?  Your opponent doesn't know you've made conditional moves until after they've played one of the moves you've anticipated...

The settings chosen by the individual will also play a part as to whether they even see the conditional move straight away. For some people, as soon as they have made their move, that game goes to the bottom of their list based on the time remaining before the next move is due. Therefore if they have a lot of games in progress, it is possible that they will only discover your conditional move at a much later time.

So why not create your own database?

I save my analysis on MS Word and copy some games I find interesting and relevant.

Personally I enjoy setting up my own databases. It’s hard work but chess requires both imagination and hard work, and not just copying moves.

Barefoot_Player.

Deepgreene, "You obviously have no idea what you're talking about" is applicable for you - you did not even go near what I said!

Databases are, and have always been, an important part of corespondence chess, and the best CC players use them a lot.

I was not talking about using databases - I also use them! I was talking about ease of using databases! They should not be made so easy that a loafer can play 1000's of games without exerting, and inconvenience others! They should be difficult to use, so one can run a maximum of a few dozens or so - not hundreds!

How on earth does one "ignore" conditional moves?  Your opponent doesn't know you've made conditional moves until after they've played one of the moves you've anticipated...

Take e.g.: you have given several conditional moves. That guy gives his move after 5 days as usual. AFTER GIVING A SINGLE MOVE HE MOVES ON TO THE NEXT GAME - He ignores the prompt "Your opponent has given a conditional move" and manually moves away from the game without giving the move! Do you understand now?

Honestly...game explorer is 3 clicks away anyhow.   But I guess some people want access to explorer directly from the position in the game...so the explorer immediately shows options from that position?  I think it's not really a learning tool then - just an answer feeder.  

I support the idea that there should be an optional note at the bottom of any seek or any tournament that indicates whether study material is allowed. It works out just fine.  

while we are on the subject of databases, should chess.com add the link to the database, perhaps they could also delete the games that are complete trash, like this one?

http://www.chess.com/games/view.html?id=2779269

@dsarkar

Making or keeping an existing feature (the Game Explorer database) hard to use is not the answer.  If you want to put a cap on the number of games someone can play at once, then that's the "feature" you should be asking for... but it's not a good feature either.

People who use databases are not "lazy."  One of the great joys of correspondence chess is that it allows you to more deeply explore opening lines than would ever be possible OTB.  When I consult a database, I don't just blindly assume that the move with the best score is the one to play either; I look at the top four or five choices a GMs and IMs have played from the same position and ask myself which option I understand the best, which one I find the most intuitive, which one I would play with the most confidence.  I also ask myself why I resist the other candidates, what am I failing to appreciate about those choices, what am I not seeing. 

This takes time and energy, but the reward is that a single game of chess becomes far more instructive than would otherwise be possible.  Lazy, it ain't - at least not if you're doing it right.  (It shouldn't be an "answer feeder," AfafBouardi.)

People who play 100s of games simultaneously don't sound lazy to me either - far from it, in fact.  That actually sounds rather ambitious!  However, here's the thing:  If you were going to pull that off, you'd have to manage your time quite rigorously to keep from timing (or burning) out.  What you'd probably have to do is establish rules about how many moves you were going to make per day and then make just one move per game, starting with the games where you have the least move time remaining.  And you'd have to be disciplined about that, so even if one of your moves spawned a conditional move, you would have to move on, or risk not meeting your quota of games for the day.  Lazy?  Nope.  Just someone who's cramming as much chess into their lives as correspondence time controls allow.

I agree Anthony.  I love the database to provide the lines of an opening...but once it goes out of book, it seems a bit...fishy.  If the opponent comes up with a clever response to a move...then I scurry over to the database to see what I should do and see a brilliant option I wouldn't have thought of myself...I start to feel that maybe this type of chess doesn't deserve ratings at all.

People keep mentioning that CC has historically included databases and study material (surely more laborious than clicking a game explorer with percentage wins by move). Fine.

 I think we need to create a distinction between Correspondence Chess and Online Chess or whatever we want to call it...a type of chess that is just like normal chess in its rules but has loose time controls.  Good luck controlling that.  :)

Personally, if the opponent is using the database...it could only make me a better player by being given best moves to deal with.  I rather appreciate it.  

So, generations of correspondence chess players over the ages are immoral for using a database, OK.

Correspondence chess and "online chess" in this site are EXACTLY the same thing.

Refer to the following link, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correspondence_chess_server

chess.com is clearly in the list.

Also, check the wikipedia article on Correspondence chess, on the types of correspondence chess, it says "There are three main types of correspondence chess, with server based correspondence chess becoming the most popular form in the world today, with major correspondence servers becoming as large and popular as the online blitz chess servers."

 Yeah, but traditionally in correspondence everything goes, while on Chess.com, certain things are illegal - using chess engines and discussing the game with other people, for instance (databases ARE of course allowed, hence this thread).

My mother is an Oprah fan.  :)

DeepGreene, you sound like another of those selfish players who enjoy at other's expense - boring your opponents to death!

Oh, your avg Time per move is 19 hrs 27 mins - no wonder!

I do not have anything to discuss with selfish, self-centered people who do not have consideration for others!

Yes.  I admit it.  My average move time is less than 1/3 of the shortest per-move time control my opponents have ever agreed to play:  It's just my little way of letting the world know what a prick I am.  Sure, in public, I blame family, work, travel, other hobbies - a 'balanced' life, as it were.  But in my black, crusty little heart, you just know that I'm relishing every second of not-moving, and enjoying my opponents' suffering.  mwuh-ha-ha.  Suckers.

Just wanted to let the last two posters know...I appreciate the entertainment.  :)  DeepGreene, I especially liked the "black, crusty little heart" bit.

AfafBouardi: I agree Anthony.  I love the database to provide the lines of an opening...but once it goes out of book, it seems a bit...fishy.  If the opponent comes up with a clever response to a move...then I scurry over to the database to see what I should do and see a brilliant option I wouldn't have thought of myself...I start to feel that maybe this type of chess doesn't deserve ratings at all.

Yes. The database can detract from game if you let it... being basically a crutch that allows one to avoid thinking for oneself (or at all) a dozen moves or more into the game.  This amounts to little more than harmless procrastination... eventually the game leaves the database and the player has no choice but to play for himself... and anyway -- I'm being perfectly serious -- people for whom avoiding thinking is enjoyable aren't going to last long in the chess hobby anyway. 

To the thoughtful player, the database presents a new challenge: "how to use this tool most intelligently" ... it's not a trivial question. Using a database intelligently requires work, knowledge, and even creativity... blindly following statistics is NOT the most intelligent use of the Db, as anyone who has followed winning percentages down to a 100% winning line only to find it represented by a blunder filled game played by 9 year olds, knows. 

It is fun, and a challenge, to use a database well, I'm still a beginner. I'm just starting to appreciate how much more can be gotten out of a Db by doing one's homework on an opening, learning where and what are the criticial decisions in it.

In OTB chess, we are all familiar with 'opening, middle, and endgame' -- cc chess has two phases that are overlaid those other three; in-base, and out-of-base.  The in-base phase of the game is it's own distinct entity,and the transition point from in-base to out-of-base can be (should be) a critical, tension filled moment.

Mine just recently went over the 2hour mark, due to exams.

Mind answering my points, then?

SensFan33,

I have nothing against databases - in fact, I also use it - I have declared as such in my public profile so that there is no misunderstanding. OK, the difference in our opinions I am trying to ellaborate with an example:

credit cards are very good things, provided there is no credit card fraud. There are lots of checks to prevent credit cards fraud. So ease of using databases is good, okay, if there is some checks, e.g.: people with a very long avg time/move should be barred from specific tournaments and team matches, so that those few do not hold the rest of the matches down. You know, guns should not be readily available, so that every crook has one!

Again, my logic is not against databases, but against abusers.