A TALLY OF DATABASE-USERS & NON-USERS

But the Rolling Stones' Gimme Shelter and Woodstock carried an unparalleled tune, don't you think? :)

PhilipUser -- Is there a practical or policy reason why you would prefer your opponents to be playing with the same resources as you?

I've thought that it really would not matter to me what my opponent was using -- even if it was a cheating program with an algorithm -- so long as he or she was playing at a level represented by his or her rating. That is, if my opponent is rated at, say, 1800 because he uses databases, books, the analysis board, and takes a long time to ponder his moves, it should be no different to me than if he is rated at 1800 because that is his OTB skill level and he uses no other aids. If I'm getting the equivalent of an 1800 player's beating, then I'm getting what I expect, no matter what the "source" of his ability. That would hold true for me even if he was a 900 rated rookie who was using a computer program that was rated at 1800. I'm still getting what I expect. So as a practical matter, I would not see any difference, but I can see people making a policy choice about what sort of games they want to play.

I agree with you that perhaps the greatest advantage from using permitted aids is in the opening. I know some lines in some openings, but I use the databases and books as a way of checking if the move my opponent made is a variation I don't know or just going "out of book." All the databases in the world don't help, however, when your opponent goes out of book or takes a very untrodden path very early.

The analysis board is helpful at every stage of the game because my board vision is pretty inconsistent. It is extremely helpful to actually see the variations play out rather than having to calculate in my head. Now whether that is a crutch that is hurting me or a tool that is helping me is an open question.

True, studio recorded sound is sonically cleaner, but not purer. It depends whether you are commenting on the cleanliness and accuracy of the sound or the emotional engagement and purity of purpose. Improvisation has a certain purity of purpose which can't be replicated in the studio (unless it is a live, one-take recording which is the same thing anyway). This is why I thought it was such a good analogy, because I think it is exactly the same for chess - the game which is well researched and thought through with an analysis board will be more accurate and 'cleaner', but the game which is more improvised, played through by memory of opening lines and such will have more purity of purpose.

Cheers, Art. I'd not seen this statement before. (I was probably too busy reading an opening book and unfairly taking advantage of my opponents.)

A point I've tried to make is that I don't find anything wrong at all with the idea that someone would want to play a variant that is esentially a hybrid of OTB and CC. What I find bothersome and objectionable is words like "fair play" and "unfair advantage." As I've said before, this is either a sign of simple ignorance of what CC is, or an arrogant attitude toward people who want to do something different.

I think we would all get along better as a community if we accepted that different people want to play different variations, and that there is nothing wrong with it.

You'll be saying you like jazz, next! 

I have only two rules. "See, One, I don't date musicians, and Two, *I do NOT kill people*!"   {which movie?}

 Wow!!! I did not expect that cynical comment from a supposed to be 'perfect gentleman' like you, sir. It looks like you're running out of good arguments here that you become personal and emotional in your comments. What does gender and win-loss record have to do with your tally? Did you feel insulted that a young woman and a newcomer is performing well in this site? (and I haven't been into using opening databases). Be real, sir!

Hi ”duffer”…

Good post – i have nothing to add J

As to your question… I see your point – and to answer the question in short I think it more must be a policy thing on my part. I see chess both as a fascinating, exiting game as well as a competition between two minds. I realize it can be argued that it still is a competition between two minds even when both are using the aids discussed in this thread – and I won’t say otherwise on that J… but I think in whatever fashion the game is played it ideally should be played on equal terms because of the element of competition – or, that’s what I’m looking for anyway… and since I prefer the game as a non-user I like more to play non-users… However I’m currently enjoying the 1^st chess.com tournament and I don’t mind knowing that I’m playing user as well… so this is not a big thing for me…

But if you ask me – I’m a non-user… I prefer playing my games on equal terms, preferably without the use of various aids…

Hope this answers the question…

/Kaj

I would certainly be weaker OTB than I am here. That is not necessarily just because I would lose the databases and books. I have not played serious OTB chess for thirty years and doubt I could easily get back into the necessary mind set to play at or near my rating here. I suspect that the other major reason I would not play as well OTB would be the lack of an analyis board of some sort and not being permitted to make notes.

However, I doubt that all high rating users of databases and books on this site would be as badly weakened as I would be. I think there are some very strong OTB players here who happen make use of all the aids at their disposal when playing turn based or correspondence chess.

I would guess that users of the DB would beat non-users of the DB, only because I view the users group as more serious and therefore the average rating would be higher.

But, let's face it, the real answer to that question probably lies wherever the top 5 players on the site fall. If GM Rakhmanator doesn't use a DB then it may not matter.

Edit: I view the users group as more serious and therefore the average playing strength would be higher.

I'm a duffer at online chess and I'm a duffer at OTB. I assume my OTB rating would be a few hundred points lower than my online rating.

In the category of "for what it's worth": C.J.S. Purdy was the first correspondence chess world champion but was "only" an IM in OTB play. He wrote that the major difference between CC and OTB play is how important "board vision" is to each -- helpful for CC but critical for OTB. If you have very strong board vision, you may well have an OTB rating that is close or even the same as your CC rating. But if (as I do) you have a sketchy board vision, your CC rating should be quite a bit higher.

I use the opening database to help increase my knowledge of the openings that I play.

The notion that I use it to give me every possible advantage to beat my opponent is not true.

If:

1. If you're a woman, then please don't take my notes in as they were directed to a man whom I incorrectly thought you were. As I said, it's just a hunch. And I stand corrected, young lady. A silly mistake on my part.

2. But if you're the man whom I thought you were, then you know what hit you. Bug off, Sir.

The distinction between User and Non-User is on the basis of these COT guidelines:  

NON-USERS "... play "over the board" chess, as if we were playing face to face, and unable to use analysis boards, opening books, or any other external aid to help us, we promised we would use our knowledge and experience only to play the game."   ( http://circleoftrust.bravehost.com/ )   

USERS use any or all legitimate facilities while playing the game. This EXCLUDES Chess Engines (such as Fritz) and Endgame Tablebases. (chess.com playing rules)

Note: the tally is being made to -

1.  Know one's preference (User or Non-User "while playing");

2.  Know the reasons behind the preference (optional, really).

Those who want to imply "better" issues (e.g. "who is better?") may better create another blog topics for them, as this one is actually just a preference-tally.

Per Artfizz's Standings:

Users - 65... Non-Users - 57

This is a very interesting thread. Did someone post an average of the users vs. non-users ratings? I think my rating would probably drop by about 50-100 if I didn't use the DB at all. I know my chosen openings quite well, but would probably have made a few blunders if I hadn't checked up a few strange variations.

I see what Ozzie Cobblepot is saying about the users being more 'serious' players. I know that, when I am using the DB, I am using it to learn my chosen openings  better so I can start playing OTB again. However, I would imagine that many of the COT group are very serious players who believe in the purity of their vision. I think that having groups like COT on this site is excellent - it gives those with specific requirements an outlet for their way of playing.

Fancy a game, Ozzie? We can both check the DB to make sure our opening lines are just so, but when we get into the middlegame it's just you and me, sir. I fancy the Dutch/French if you are white, but if you are black then we'll need to go somewhere other than the C-K! At least I have the analysis board to assist my lack of board vision.