So would you say you would be more likely to play against engine users here on chess.com than on the legal engine site Syrtis?
I take you are asking if the number of engine users is greater here or there? If so, I have no idea. I haven't played here that much and it was a long time ago. To be honest, I wasn't much concerned with whether or not I was playing an engine user or not, I was more irritated by a couple of accusations from idiots.
I suspect my experience would be much the same as on the other site, everyone reaches a level and the engine users are generally higher than the non-engine users. There will be some overlap due to very good "non-assisted" players being able to hold their own against the less able "engine assisted".
The thing that might surprise some is the range of ratings occupied by those using an engine. One would imagine that most would use the strongest engine available and would therefore be concentrated in a narrow band.
Well you obviously like this site as you're here now, even if not playing.
Come here then, I can find you a hole to dig.. a big hole, for a lap pool.. only condition is, I'd need you to also build the lap pool. lol
so she only allows you to dig holes for random internet ladies of the male persuasion? lol.
lol .. well I used to think that way too until I saw this lady... err man..
once is an experiment...
twice and you're gay! : ^ )
As its 24 hour x (x) based...
Long Duration Chess (Long Name too)
Tempting, but a) you are a long way away and last time I was there I got harrassed by a mad economist; and b) my wife objects to me digging holes for random internet ladies of the female persuasion.
Just to drag this whole thing back on topic, I still favour server chess. It's played on a server so that seems apt. Correspondence chess doesn't really work as correspondence suggests people scribing missives with quill pens rather than mucking about with electrons on the interthingy.
'Server Chess' makes me think of tennis...
Worldwide Recorded Chess .?
I thought this discussion was over. They're not going to rename it, at least not during my life time (I'm 27...)
Voting still open....but too few doing so, I think.
New generation chess
New world chess
Ok I'm done
Dont know if some are mentioned before:
Since this topic continues...and continues...why don't we just call "On-line Chess" : "Something for People with Too Much Time on Their Hands"?
OK. I've come to this discussion very late. But I'm going to try to take it in a new direction that may actually be helpful to Erik. I ought to mention that I tried to read all of the thread but I realised at about page 35 that there probably wasn't much point. So I skipped to the last couple of pages and now here I am. So if someone has already made the point I'm about to make, I apologise.
I think Erik was pretty clear that he wants to rename "Online Chess" for vaguely marketing reasons, so what would marketing theory tell us about a name change? (Sorry to those of you who are allergic to marketing; so am I, in a way, but it's the world we live in!)
1. The name of a product needs clearly to reflect the brand's values.
2. The name of the product needs to appeal to the users or intended users of the product.
There may be more, but let's leave it at that for now. Next question : How would professional marketeers go about renaming an exisiting product? I suggest they would study:-
1) Who is using the product?
2) How are they using it?
3) What features of the product do they appreciate?
4) Why? What is it about these features that makes them value the product?
Until you answer these questions you cannot possibly even begin to think about what is the right name for the product.
So in my next post I will talk about my experience of online correspondence chess on chess.com, as my contribution to the debate. But for now, my wife is calling me for dinner. Joe.
Me again. As I was saying, I would like to encourage everyone who uses "online" chess on chess.com (or possibly other sites) or who thinks they maybe might use it, to share who they are (age, gender, chess experience, etc.), why they use it, how they use it, what they are looking for, etc... I hope chess.com will be able to use the responses to decide on wha the core values should be for "online chess" and from there, what may or may not be the right name for it. (If you don't use it, and you think correspondence chess is for mummies and zombies, you needn't bother to respond. This discussion just isn't for you.) To kick things off, here's my contribution:
I'm male, 56 years old (I think), and I was taught chess by my Spanish grandfather when I was about 8 or 9. I then didn't play hardly at all for about the next 25 years. In my mid-thirties I occasionally played against a computer (Battlechess) and I discovered a) that chess could be fun and b) that the Ruy Lopez opening was not compulsory. Shortly after I moved away from London to the SW of England, leaving behind a lot of friends and family. One of my London friends played chess to a similar (but slightly bettter) standard than me and we hit on the idea of staying in touch by playing correspondence chess - which I think we did by email, using a spreadsheet attachment to display the board. This fizzled out after a few years (though recently I think I've enticed him to join chess.com). About 5 years ago work took me even further afield and I lived in the Caribbean for a couple of years. I remembered about using correspondence chess to keep in touch and eventually ended up on chess.com where I play online chess with 2 people who are far away and that I don't get to see enough of. If you saw our games you'd be amazed at how we over-use the chat facility. In a way that's what it's about for me. It truly is "correspondence" chess because we use it literally to correspond. We set the time limit to the maximum (14 days) because it's always a disappointment when someone is too busy to play and the game times out. Yes, I'd go as far as to say that the chess is almost incidental; it's the chat that counts. Bu the discipline of having to play a move in a given time frame forces us to stay in touch.
What I value about online chess on chess.com is that it works and works well. Initially I also valued that it was free but I have recently upgraded because I love Tactics Trainer. I don't play Live chess because I kind of feel that I'm too inexperienced to play quickly; I have to really think hard to avoid making horrible blunders. Also I never know whether I will be able to sit at the computer without interruptions for long enough to finish a game. With correspondence chess I don't need to worry about that - if I get called away then it doesn't matter, I'll make my move tomorrow. Which is the opposite of what someone said somewhere in this thread - that long format chess is for men who don't have a girlfriend; seems to me that live chess would be more of a problem in that respect. With correspondence chess you can stop any time to go and do what you have to do.
That's enough initimate confessions for now. One final point that I haven't seen mentioned. Chess.com is an international site. Many members are not native English speakers. Chess.com needs to be careful not to confuse those users. Any new name needs to be intuitive for people from different cultures, I suggest.
Picking up on another theme in this thread. It has been suggested that correspondence chess is rife with people cheating by using chess engines to help find the right move. Not an issue for me because I only play against people I know and trust.
I was thinking that in the very unlikely event that most people who use "online chess" use it like me then it ought to be called Friendly Chess or Chat Chess. The trouble with Friendly Chess is that it might imply that live chess isn't friendly (which it probably is) and that Online Chess is always friendly (which it probably isn't). Chat Chess is obviously too silly.
I have another suggestion...
How about Time Lapse Chess? As in time lapse photography. If you don't know what Time Lapse Photography is, take a look at this, which I found rather beautiful:
The three letter acronym (TLA) for Time Lapse Chess is TLC, and TLC is also the TLA for Tender Loving Care. Ohhh! How sweet!
Anyway, as I said above, we'll never know what the right name is unless we know who is using it, or likely to use it, and why. So let's have your experiences!
How about Corresponding Chess.