Is vote chess a good way to learn?

crazypiglady

I thought maybe discussing with other players would help me think about a next move in a game but I'm not sure how vote chess works and what group would be appropriate to join to vote in. Does anyone have any suggestions of a group/club that would be suitable for someone around 1187 (daily) to join and discuss moves?

Thanks.

AlbAmchess

This club is very organized with vote chess, and has never lost or drawn one yet. The thing is, I’m not sure if it’s open to all players, but it may be- https://www.chess.com/club/scary-ninjas

yakuza_ronin

was interested in the same thing and joined some active vote chess clubs and my conclusion is that it entirely depends on the folks on your team and how well they discuss the moves / strategy.  many of the vote chess games i saw nobody talks...just log their move and leave.

please let us know if you find a club you'd recommend.

JosephReidNZ

Personally no

crazypiglady
AlbAmchess wrote:This club is very organized with vote chess,  https://www.chess.com/club/scary-ninjas"

Thanks. It was open pending admins acceptance so I'm in that now. I'll let you know how it goes. Thanks for the tip.

 

crazypiglady
JosephReidNZ wrote:

Personally no"

Ok. Thanks. I'll have a look. There's possibly one out there.

crazypiglady
yakuza_ronin wrote:

was interested in the same thing and joined some active vote chess clubs and my conclusion is that it entirely depends on the folks on your team and how well they discuss the moves / strategy.  many of the vote chess games i saw nobody talks...just log their move and leave.

please let us know if you find a club you'd recommend.

Thanks Yakuza. I'm sure there must be one out there aimed at discussing moves with the aim of learning. I'll let you know if I find one. Otherwise, I wonder if maybe its possible/easy to create one and what's involved.  I'll keep you updated.

marknatm

Well, you may want to see if there is a club who plays vote chess for an opening that you play.  As an example, the Caro-Kann.  The nice thing is that you can participate in the votes for moves in a game and then analyze your moves against those chosen by consensus.  It may help you to learn why your move was more superior/inferior to others as the game progresses.  Annotating your own games is one way to improve.   What openings do you like to play?

bonebroth

learn the sheer agony and unswerving unoriginality of group mentality today groupthink now available at vote chessvotechess.png

TacticalBlindSpot
crazypiglady wrote:

I thought maybe discussing with other players would help me think about a next move in a game but I'm not sure how vote chess works and what group would be appropriate to join to vote in. Does anyone have any suggestions of a group/club that would be suitable for someone around 1187 (daily) to join and discuss moves?

Thanks.

Vote Chess can be fun, but it is not a good way to learn.  The reasons are simple:

1)  There are usually more lower rated players voting than stronger players.  Getting 90 1200s discussing moves is pointless.  They will simply outnumber the 10 2000+ players in the group.

2)  Even among stronger players, style can come into play.  This is especially true in opening choices.  Worse, if you have 2 groups that "split the vote" between 2 equally good choices (i.e. a positional choice and a tactical one), the likelihood of a 3rd choice (which is usually a mistake) winning is very high.

3)  As the game goes on, stronger players will get frustrated by the mistakes that win the vote and leave the game.  This means that you are left with the worst players in the late middle and endgame.

 

In short, Vote Chess is a bit like playing blitz or bullet:  do it to have fun, but do not expect to improve doing it.

mbereobong
TacticalBlindSpot wrote:
crazypiglady wrote:

I thought maybe discussing with other players would help me think about a next move in a game but I'm not sure how vote chess works and what group would be appropriate to join to vote in. Does anyone have any suggestions of a group/club that would be suitable for someone around 1187 (daily) to join and discuss moves?

Thanks.

Vote Chess can be fun, but it is not a good way to learn.  The reasons are simple:

1)  There are usually more lower rated players voting than stronger players.  Getting 90 1200s discussing moves is pointless.  They will simply outnumber the 10 2000+ players in the group.

2)  Even among stronger players, style can come into play.  This is especially true in opening choices.  Worse, if you have 2 groups that "split the vote" between 2 equally good choices (i.e. a positional choice and a tactical one), the likelihood of a 3rd choice (which is usually a mistake) winning is very high.

3)  As the game goes on, stronger players will get frustrated by the mistakes that win the vote and leave the game.  This means that you are left with the worst players in the late middle and endgame.

 

In short, Vote Chess is a bit like playing blitz or bullet:  do it to have fun, but do not expect to improve doing it.

The best way to prevent any of this from happening is to enforce a vote call based off a consensus, and boot the ones that ignore it to prevent unwanted moves.

m_connors

It might give you insight into how other people think; however, I'm not sure it will help you learn or get better. And, as noted above, the level, experience and number of participants also makes a big difference.

TacticalBlindSpot
mbereobong wrote:

The best way to prevent any of this from happening is to enforce a vote call based off a consensus, and boot the ones that ignore it to prevent unwanted moves.

And that is a great way to see blunders happen every other move.  A consensus among 1200 players will still be at 1200 strength.  It only takes 1 2000 to point out that all of them are wrong, yet Vote Chess will drown out the superior line by sheer numbers.

 

There is a reason that virtually all Master vs World games favor the master (even when Masters are in the World group!).  The strength of the group is equivalent to the mode of their ratings.

mbereobong
TacticalBlindSpot wrote:
mbereobong wrote:

The best way to prevent any of this from happening is to enforce a vote call based off a consensus, and boot the ones that ignore it to prevent unwanted moves.

And that is a great way to see blunders happen every other move.  A consensus among 1200 players will still be at 1200 strength.  It only takes 1 2000 to point out that all of them are wrong, yet Vote Chess will drown out the superior line by sheer numbers.

 

There is a reason that virtually all Master vs World games favor the master (even when Masters are in the World group!).  The strength of the group is equivalent to the mode of their ratings.

This is why the person officiating the vote calls should be someone of a high level.

yakuza_ronin

@tacticalblindspot from my short experience with vote chess, your points are all accurate.  a shame really but we're dealing with the nature of strangers with their own interests/motivations so hard to complain.  like you said, dont set expectations of learning too high.

@mbereobong   agree.  unfortunately, from what i've seen the vote chess here doesnt give the tools for someone to moderate their own team members.  maybe some day they will improve the vote chess experience knowing these pitfalls.

gambitattax

Vote chess is a good way to enjoy chess with your teammates and have fun.

I have involved myself in many vote chess games in the past, I had lots of fun but hardly learnt anything new.

VC would help beginners more than higher rated players.

SpiderUnicorn
TacticalBlindSpot wrote:
crazypiglady wrote:

I thought maybe discussing with other players would help me think about a next move in a game but I'm not sure how vote chess works and what group would be appropriate to join to vote in. Does anyone have any suggestions of a group/club that would be suitable for someone around 1187 (daily) to join and discuss moves?

Thanks.

Vote Chess can be fun, but it is not a good way to learn.  The reasons are simple:

1)  There are usually more lower rated players voting than stronger players.  Getting 90 1200s discussing moves is pointless.  They will simply outnumber the 10 2000+ players in the group.

2)  Even among stronger players, style can come into play.  This is especially true in opening choices.  Worse, if you have 2 groups that "split the vote" between 2 equally good choices (i.e. a positional choice and a tactical one), the likelihood of a 3rd choice (which is usually a mistake) winning is very high.

3)  As the game goes on, stronger players will get frustrated by the mistakes that win the vote and leave the game.  This means that you are left with the worst players in the late middle and endgame.

 

In short, Vote Chess is a bit like playing blitz or bullet:  do it to have fun, but do not expect to improve doing it.

1) Not in my team. In Team Australia most players that discuss the moves in Vote Chess are not beginners. They are people like @BorgQueen, @tbonius, @Kurt_Stromer and others, who you can hardly call 1200s, or beginners. I find that most beginners simply forget about the VC they've joined and are inactive in the discussion, or they just drive-by vote. 

2) If there are two equally good choices, then usually both of them shall go into the vote call, and the result depends on the vote. A third choice is only put into the call only if the group decides that if it is just as good, if not better than the other two choices. If the 3rd choice is a mistake, then the players mentioned above usually will spot it, so you cannot say that the chance of it going into the vote call "very high", let alone it being the move that wins in the vote. 

3) That is simply wrong, since mistakes, if spotted, cannot be voted for at all, since they will not make it into the vote call, which contains the only moves the players can vote for. 

btickler
TacticalBlindSpot wrote:

Vote Chess can be fun, but it is not a good way to learn.  The reasons are simple:

1)  There are usually more lower rated players voting than stronger players.  Getting 90 1200s discussing moves is pointless.  They will simply outnumber the 10 2000+ players in the group.

2)  Even among stronger players, style can come into play.  This is especially true in opening choices.  Worse, if you have 2 groups that "split the vote" between 2 equally good choices (i.e. a positional choice and a tactical one), the likelihood of a 3rd choice (which is usually a mistake) winning is very high.

3)  As the game goes on, stronger players will get frustrated by the mistakes that win the vote and leave the game.  This means that you are left with the worst players in the late middle and endgame.

 

In short, Vote Chess is a bit like playing blitz or bullet:  do it to have fun, but do not expect to improve doing it.

[and]

And that is a great way to see blunders happen every other move.  A consensus among 1200 players will still be at 1200 strength.  It only takes 1 2000 to point out that all of them are wrong, yet Vote Chess will drown out the superior line by sheer numbers.

There is a reason that virtually all Master vs World games favor the master (even when Masters are in the World group!).  The strength of the group is equivalent to the mode of their ratings.

Ridiculous.  

- Votechess is highly instructive when played on a good team

- Your premise is just bad...a group of votechess players at any rating level plays significantly better than an individual at the same rating

- Outright blunders are actually quite rare in votechess with any team that has more than a handful of players...inaccuracies are quite common, though

- Master vs. Many votechess games are the lowest common denominator of votechess, and should in no way be taken as a good example of how votechess is supposed to function

P.S. Yakuza Ronin is incorrect...votes are visible, and a club admin can remove any player from the team that is not voting by that club's rules.

drmrboss

No!! Definately not!

I checked one of your random game.

. I saw serious problem in opening such as 2...c6  3... f6 within first 5 moves. You definately need a good opening repertoire. A few good books or CD, or youtube videos will be necessary to build basic understanding of development of pieces, opening etc. 

Train tactics for middle games

Do endgame study.

 

Votechess is like a joke for study. Every player (even engines) change in mind/plan  depending on allocated time and searched depth. 

Bramblyspam

It all depends on the players. A good vote chess team will have some strong players who are active in leading the discussion, and good discipline in the voting. For example, a team may have rules that nobody votes until 24 hours before the deadline (so there's time for discussion), and nobody votes for a move that hasn't been suggested in the discussion.

You won't learn much from VC games if your team has no discussion or discipline, but not all teams are like that. My recommendation is to look at some completed VC games, click the "archive" tab, and go through the entire game move by move, checking for the quality of the discussion. When you find a club with a VC team that impresses you, join it. 

Here's an example of what VC at its finest can look like. Both teams had great discussion and discipline, and were led by strong players who were happy to share their thoughts. Check it out if you like.

https://www.chess.com/votechess/game/120456?mv=0&san=e5&activePagination=archive