A TALLY OF DATABASE-USERS & NON-USERS

From this day on no more database during game, the moves aren't really sticking in my mind...  Non-user for me.

MBickley wrote: From this day on no more database during game, the moves aren't really sticking in my mind...  Non-user for me.

Do all above-OTB facilities suffer from the same drawbacks?

• Opening Databases / Game Explorer / Books provide canned expertise that can be considered and evaluated - BUT they could prevent you thinking for yourself
  
• The Analysis Board forces you to think for yourself - BUT it may impair your visualisation skills
  
• Rewinding Moves / Last Piece Moved indicator - can give you a perspective on the game - BUT may impair memorisation
• PRESS SUBMIT to move - gives you more scope to consider alternatives AND a second chance to repair a blunder - BUT it may slow down your reflexes or blunt your instinct for danger when playing TOUCH MOVE.

Artfizz, yo! That's a great table (Post #189) you made there, really. Thank you so much.

As in any other survey where a number of posts pose a certain difficulty in their interpretations, I would suggest that we take Art's table as the "official" tally - until some corrections are submitted by the players themselves indicating otherwise.

So, now it stands at: Users - 47, Non-Users -42

Note:  this is just a tally, thus no judgments can be inferred on these numbers. We simply lay down our cards, and agree to disagree on viewpoints shared.

Questions for the Users:

1.  How did you know you've improved by using outside help such as databases, softwares, books, and the like?

       (Don't tell us it's your rating because that number has many variables, like strength of opponent, gross negligence/oversight of the opponent, among others);

2.  How sure are you that you're learning the right moves when looking into databases of the masters' games when the Masters themselves admit that due to OTB pressures, they make dubious openings, and tactical mistakes?

       (Don't tell us that there's no other way.)

3.  When challenged to a game by a Non-User, would you accept to fight on equal terms - that is, you'ld play on OTB rules even in a Correspondence Chess venue?  If so, or if ever you've done it a billion times already, how did you feel about the game - meaning did you have the same confidence as if you're playing with the outside helps on?

       (Honestly now, please..."

1. I don't claim to have improved by using databases, books etc. I use them as an extended memory for the first few moves of the game. I may also use books on the endgame to give me a general idea as to what I should be doing in a particular situation. I have been using these aids for many years, they have always been part of my correspondence chess play. I have found that playing many games and studying whole games to be the best way to improve but I do not study while playing as such.

2. I am not sure that the moves in databases are best. I use the database and books as an indication of what various masters have played and think is sound in a given position. This is much like anyone else studying an opening - if you take what the masters say as gospel you may well just be following a less than optimal line. If you do not understand the positions resulting from the moves played you will not be able to play well once memory or book/database runs out. I examine database and book moves critically and make my final decision based on my own assessment of the position and stylistic preferences.

3. I'll counter that with another question: Would a non-user agree to become a user so that they are fighting on equal terms when playing correspondence chess? For myself, I play correspondence chess exclusively and therefore would not agree to rules that I regard as artificial and unenforceable. If I were playing OTB chess then I would not be using books or other sources of help. If I were playing blitz using such aids would probably result in a loss on time!

I think the main problem here is a difference of expectation. I expect a game where I can take many days to make a single move to be played under correspondence rules whereas those who have never played "real" correspondence chess come expecting to play under OTB rules. I don't think there is any good way to solve this problem other than agreeing to disagree.

Hmmm... thanks. Now I know.

Gonnosuke wrote:

Olimar wrote:

the problem with this is that your not trying to make a better wheel :( your just mimcing  a design proven to be effective.  From here, the rest of your argument is somewhat flimsy.  Your best point is the efficiency of learning, which is the best way to argue for database usage, it is one argument that cannot be denied.

Maybe I wasn't clear.  Existing theory = the wheel.  The user who doesn't use reference materials and wants to find the best moves on their own is, in essence, trying to reinvent the wheel.  The player who uses reference materials sees that there's already "a design proven to be effective", decides to incorporate that pre-existing knowledge into his or her studies with the hope and intention of using it effectively.  If they have the skill and dedication, who knows, maybe they'll even find improvements that are successful in their own chess games. 

My point all along has been that the reference materials are the best way to learn.  Even for players who don't give a damn about truly understanding an opening and who just want to memorize moves, there is no better way to do that than to use reference materials in CC games in my opinion.  Even better is to play in thematic tournaments.  If you can't memorize an opening by the end of a thematic tournament then perhaps memorization isn't for you.

much better argument than the one I quoted you on earlier :P  I would say that this MAY be the best way to learn up until a certain rating, a "ceiling" of sorts.  From that point on, I truly believe you must just have a certain amount of games under your belt from which to reexamine and study your own personal errors and to study WHY certain openings fail or succeed against certain variations.  Refrence materials will help you reach that ceiling for sure, but after that... I honestly believe its all about trial and error and studying individual games.  Your reaction?

I've heard masters say the best way to learn an opening is to play through it countless times disregarding the outcome.  This is because you need to see all the variations and possibilities.  I feel this is impossible for weak players without the use of books and databases and because it is not against the rules there is no reason not to use them except in your head...  It's pride that's getting in the way.  It's like playing American Football and complaining that some guys tackle you.  It's part of the game get used to it.  It all seems like a lot of whining...

To address mainstreet:

1. I don't know that I am getting better.  I think I am because although I use the book and very rarely the databases, I can play 10-15 moves into Najdorf by memory.  I didn't even know what it was until I started playing correspondence chess.  I'm horrible at memorizing things but I have commited almost 20 openings to memory in two months playing correspondence chess at a comfortable and layed back pace. 

2. You know that you are making the right moves when you win more than you lose.  That's it.  It has nothing to do with the book or the databases.  We still PLAY the games.  If we lose a piece or fall into a trap that's a lesson learned I might even write it down to make sure I don't do it again.  Then I refer to my NOTES until I don't need them anymore and then I throw them out.

3. As for non-users... If you don't want to play by the rules don't play the game.  I think if you need help and don't use it YOU are cheating!  You are cheating yourself: out of a good game, out of an educational experience, out of exciting lines you might not find yourself, and out of an oppurtunity to play at a very high level.  And your cheating me out of a competitive opponent.  If a friend and I agree to OTB rules that's fine.  I don't really care.  I've said before I don't use help in most games.  I don't think my rating would go down if I stopped using help today, but I know it would not go up as fast as it was.

Anthony

Dr Emmanueal Lasker (28 years world champion) once said(wrote)to be a good chess player,that one should empty ones head off all varitations,combinations....etc,start from a fresh,with a clear head! 

When I know my opponent is a premium member and is using Game Explorer, I like to play the Database game with him.  I pick a game to follow as the game goes on that wins for my side.  My opponent will eventually have to deviate from the game to have a chance.  Then I try to capitalize on any mistake made during deviation.

MainStreet wrote: Questions for the Users: ...3.  When challenged to a game by a Non-User, would you accept to fight on equal terms - that is, you'ld play on OTB rules even in a Correspondence Chess venue?    If so, or if even you've done it a billion times already, how did you feel about the game - meaning did you have the same confidence as if you're playing with the outside helps on?      (Honestly now, please..."

I mentioned these 4 types of assistance:

1. Opening Databases / Game Explorer / Books
   
2. Analysis Board
   
3. Rewinding Moves / Last Piece Moved indicator 
   
4. PRESS SUBMIT to move

thegab03 wrote:

Dr Emmanueal Lasker (28 years world champion) once said(wrote)to be a good chess player,that one should empty ones head off all varitations,combinations....etc,start from a fresh,with a clear head! 

Ha! well said indeed.  There is no "arrogance" in refusing to use the game explorer.  Its a silly argument to make.  Indeed, a fresh head with creative thoughts can win the game!

Let me make one thing perfectly clear: I am not disputing MainStreet's tally - I am disputing my own! I begin to appreciate the complexity of the task he has undertaken. Thanks again, MainStreet.

Several people didn't make their views explicit - so there is some guesswork involved. Corrections not merely welcome ... DEMANDED!

Also, COT Guidelines are NOT entirely clear. The Analysis Board DOES count as outside help (which not everyone realised). What about: rewinding the board to look at past moves? Who knows?

Users: 48   Non:Users 41

                                Version 2.0 (update)

bk and db user...but I only use recreationally.

Artfizz, again, thank you so much for an updated table! You make it easier for everyone to see in a glance the preference of players, and the shifters who seemingly learned from the personal comments contributed by some hardliners from both sides. To the commentators, thank you so much, too!

So there you are: USERS - 49, NON-USERS - 41

... that's after adding phishcake5 to the Users.

Not fair your honour for I should not be quoted in the same group as RAEL!Cheeter No1,pro!!!

thegabo3, did we miss something here?

MainStreet wrote:

thegabo3, did we miss something here?

 Sorry sir,is my english so bad our are you under control?

it depends. when used as a tool to help your growth, as long as you admit to doing so, and play unrated games, then yes. If though, you are using it as a weapon  to gain advantage for personal vanity, as well as to buffer your rating, then it goes agaist sportsmanship so, no.

thegab03 wrote:

Not fair your honour for I should not be quoted in the same group as RAEL!Cheeter No1,pro!!!

USERS - 50, NON-USERS - 40