Use of Analyze Mode

Topic:  Does the use of the "Analyze Mode" create an unfair advantage for the player that extensively uses it versus the player that does not use it"?  And if it does, aren't the ratings of thousands of players compromised?  I have been a member for only a few months and I have never used the analyze mode before today, just to see what it was all about.  After looking at it, I'm wondering if the ability to see what positions will look like, under multiple variations, 3, 4, 5, or more moves down the road, doesn't create an unfair advantage.  Any thoughts by other members?

Lou

Both players have the option. How could it be an unfair advantage?

I assume you're talking about CC games, since use of an analysis board isn't legal for live games.  In correspondence chess use of external references and analysis boards has always been allowed, so how are the ratings compromised?  That's part of the rules and one of the differences from live chess.  Use of engines and any input on current games from other people are not allowed in CC games.

If one of the players doesn't avail himself of an allowed feature, it's not an "unfair" advantage when the the other player does.  If a coach of a football team only called running plays because he thought it unsportmanlike to throw passes, would it be "unfair" for the other team to throw passes?

Maybe my choice of wording was too negative.  What I meant was that it is much easier to find better moves if you can visually see the outcome in front of you, multiple moves ahead, without actually having to make the move.  Players naturally don't have tha ability if they are sitting at a board facing an opponent.  My point is that it is not unreasonable to say that if two players are truly evenly rated; meaning that if they played 20 games face to face against each other, let's say they would split those games.  Now take those same two players playing on line and lets assume one can use the analyze mode and one can't.  I would think the outcomes of the 20 games would now be tilted if favor of the player using the analyze mode.  If you would agree with that, my point then is that the ratings for multiple players are aided by the use of the analyze mode.  Agreed?

So all you're saying is that people can do better analysis if they use an analysis board?  Yeah, I'll agree with that.  But the bit about compromised ratings is wrong because there are two completely different pools of ratings for the two different forms of the games.  No one expects that a CC rating is supposed to have any direct correlation with a live rating where an analysis board is not allowed.  They are very explicitly separated.

So, let's say a player plays most of his or her games with a day per move duration and that player never uses the "analyze board" that is available because he wants to improve without this aid.  That player should realize that he could be losing games because other players are taking advantage of the analyze mode when making moves.  Fair to say?  And if that is fair to say, then shoudn't we take the ratings we see with a grain of salt since we don't know the extent of the use of the analyze mode by the competitors?  That's all I'm saying.

Thanks 

You can take the ratings any way you like.

But to me there's no grain of salt to be taken because there might be some people who don't want to make use of all allowed aspects of rules.  If those people think their results are poorer because of their choice, that's their problem and their fault, but it doesn't compromise the rating system.  CC has allowed analysis boards for well over 100 years-- it's nothing new.

There are dozens of forum threads where use of boards and opening databases are bemoaned by people who refuse to accept that live and CC are two separate variations of the game.  If someone decides not to do something that is allowed by rules it doesn't make him more principled nor does his choice invalidate the ratings of people who do use the option.  All it really means is that person probably isn't playing the best CC that he could.

I've seen threads in here from people who refuse to castle, saying the move is for wimps and cowards.  By your approach, all live ratings would also be suspect because we don't know how many people might be refusing to use that allowed feature of the game.

Have you ever used the analysis board and examined "all" possible moves only to have your opponent make a completely different move?

I use it but it's limited by my imagination as is any type of chess without it.

Or after the game is completed and I look at a critical position with Rybka and it immediately spits out the absolutely perfect devastating move for me that I missed.  

When I started playing on here I was at about 1300 rating. Then I found the analysis board. I have to admit that it did help. I also have gotten better  by playing better chess players than myself and getting my rear end kicked. I have gone to the libraray and read chess books.  Can I tell you what the French opening is? Heck no. Not enuff time for getting that serious.  I am at about 1500 now.  I would say that the analysis feature will give you about a extra 100 points on your rating. ?

IMHO. Thanks

Hard to say, I think.  In general people's CC ratings here might be 200 to 400 points higher than their live chess.com rating, but there are several different factors at play with CC compared to live including

• much more total thinking time available
• (usually) no time pressure forcing a hasty response
• the ability to leave a difficult position for a while and come back to it again a few hours or even days later to look at it with a fresh mind
• access to your own past games and notes as well as other sources
• opening explorers which, although they don't guarantee a good position going into the midgame, can at least be used to avoid major pitfalls in the first few moves of an unfamiliar opening
• and, of course, the ability to work out and compare prospective lines using analysis boards

How much each of these components contributes to the overall higher CC rating compared to live probably varies for different people, and maybe even from game to game or one specific opening to another depending on the experience of the player.

Well I have to maybe agree with you there buddy. Hard to say for sure. I have only played about 10 folks on line so my experiance is somewhat iffiy. I play my young 18 year old friend face to face and we play kinda fast and I sometime don't check all possablities. He beats me 80 percent of the time. We play online turn based and i beat him 90% of the time. He is rated about 1100 turn base. Does doing the analize feature jump your points 100,200,300 ??? Hard to say. But yes it does make a change in how your rating comes up.

Exactly.   

For what it's worth, I boosted my calculative ability by solving tactical puzzles where I would calculate everything I thought necessary, then at the end write down what I thought was the best line (and any sidelines).  If I didn't get the line in the back of the book, then I didn't count the puzzle as solved.  (Much different from guessing one move at a time with stuff like tactics trainer).

Don't write down as you go through it because it would help you.  If nothing else this helped me be a lot more organized in my calculation.

So if you want to use the analysis board, maybe first do everything you can without it, write down your thoughts, then check with the analysis board to see what you missed.

Ratings don't have to say what someone's max ability is. All it says is how well they play. In that way, ratings are not wrong if you play worse because you don't analyze as well without the board.

This is one goofy thread.

But it does imply an interesting point.  Way back when (as CC play grew) they decided that reference books would be legal to use, since chessplayers (being kinda weasely creatures anyway) were likely to use the things whether you prohibited them or not.

Since though people here are forbidden from using programs, it would make sense to forbid all other aids as well.  I think there are even people (groups and such) that do this...at least, I've heard it being discussed before.

[COMMENT DELETED]  Sorry...got stuck somewhere in Glitchland.

Except, as I understand it, even though CC always allowed use of references, it was never considered OK to consult with other people about ongoing games or positions.  You had to do your own thinking with your reference materials.  Engines violate the "own thinking" part, and are thus banned from online CC, so I think the online status of CC is still very similar to the traditional approach.

And CC always required faith in the integrity of the person at the other end.  For all any player knew, his opponent could potentially have been getting help from a relative or the next door neighbor, or his entire club.  People who were (are) bothered by that prospect weren't (aren't) cut out for CC.

Please forward Us a list of players who refuse to castle. We so do wish to play such heroic individuals! The Dragon >:[

Very astute post, I agree entirely.

I'm sure if one is determined to analyse each move and grind out a win, then a commensurate "online" rating increase  will ensue.

Is it worth it though?