conversation between two chess database creators - Chess Forums

budfit

Sep 8, 2008

0

#1

Hi All,

I would like to share a recent conversation between 2 database creators and constructors; GM Lubomir Ftacnik and SIM Alexander Horvath both from Slovakia and both cooperating together now and also in the future (for those who may see this opposing views as criticizing each other):

GM Ftacnik overlooks for ChessBase Maga and Corr Database

SIM Horvath overlooks for Opening Master DB

Summary of the discussion so we don’t bore you with long reading:

1) ChessBase DB is normalized on names and therefore everybody has first name and last name separately. Naturally it has therefore smaller index overhead in the files. It is supposed to be faster. In reality the speed is for human unrecognizable. The results are however different sometimes 10-15% which is warning signal for both parties. Question is who is better off.

2) Opening Master DB has limitation on moves, i.e. minimum 8 moves. Moreover, in OM DB, there are no games without bodies, i.e. only result. According to our experience OM depicts more games and has better close-up. Sometime 3-4 moves forward.

There are naturally conflicts of different approaches. On one side OM leaves out ‘important information’ what others ‘want’ (do they really?) (moves 1-8, games without bodies) but takes it more from the pragmatic view where one doesn’t care about grandmasters wins or draws in 2^nd-3^rd move (OM has mentioned limit of 8 moves minimum) or even losses which are “shocking”. “People like to read complete information about tournaments and games for statistical purposes”… (even without bodies) and like to collect complete tables of tournaments.

But is it really necessary? Today world changed a bit, you need information with value-add. Anything non-value add should be eliminated even for the sake of not pleasing the 1% of chess collectors who will miss this data.

After a long and strong conversation (repeat both players cooperate now and in future), Opening Master stays more with the pragmatic approach of having min 8 games in the database and removing all non-body games (who can learn only from the result??)

I would like players from this forum to raise their opinions, what is better for them, what kind of information will they need in the future? As perhaps it will open up some eyes. And perhaps Opening Master will start adding games with no bodies or games which ended before 8^th move or vice-a-versa Chess Base Mega will revise their total number of games and start to provide value add games only.

Best regards,

Alexander Horvath

SIM ICCF (ELO 2474)

Slovakia

Openingmaster.com

mnag

Sep 8, 2008

0

#2

I don't really know how to reply to your request. The player in me says the less fluff the better. I need to know variations, results, where, strenghth of players and type of tournament only. When working with my own personal database for study, short drawn games, games with no bodies or non GM games are usually not included so that I use only the most bare, necessary information. However, the historian in me demands more information, the more the better. I remember researching one tournament to find one game with a forfeit due to the other player's illness. Important information for the researcher in me but not the player. I am sorry, I can't say I prefer a DB one way or another.

budfit

Sep 10, 2008

0

#3

thanks for your opinion mnag

yes it's very difficult to please everyone. I am your point with historical data of tournaments (even without bodies) is perfectly valid. As mentioned above, we approached the building of the database from the pragmatic way - remove all the fluff and dirt which we won't use. We discussed it with many top players, and they were in the same opinions to use as most value add information as possible. Coming back to historians or people seeking for particular tournaments, well, yes there are few of them, and I am pretty sure they will find it. What we wanted to accomplish is to offer something for the massses - and of course without losing any quality on analysis part

thanks for the post

Alexander Horvath (SIM ICCF)

www.openingmaster.com