A TALLY OF DATABASE-USERS & NON-USERS

a hollow victory for the databased user... needing help to win a meaningless game... how pathetic

MAY I MAKE A FEW SUGGESTIONS?

I see Forums as venue to freely exchange and discuss ideas where people's understanding of specific topics is deepened. However, discussions often can get heated up when people starts to veer outside the topic on hand and when comparisons are made in an attempt to show who is better  (a holier than thou attitude). I may have been guilty of this as well in the past, so my apologies.

The moderator can do a lot in making the discussions civil by tightening on the rein when somebody is out of whack and by constantly reminding the contributors about the objective of that specific forum. He should remain neutral although he may cite his position beforehand but afterwards he should run the discussions in neutral gear. He should be a skilled peacemaker.

The moderator too should never single out anybody and should not get involved in anyway on any personal tirade and accusation like what seemingly is now happening here in this forum on databases.

The use of proverbs and scriptures should be (as much as possible) avoided especially when used without elaborating how they are connected to the topic or to a particular post because they can be misconstrued as a rebuke. I believe  scriptures are powerful but when used wrongly (yes, God's words can be used wrongly but please understand that I'm not trying to start a religious discussion here), it may be misinterpreted as saying 'I'm holier than thou' and 'I know much better than you.'

For example, I've scanned through the posts between MainStreet and Odessa and I tried to find how MainStreet's (politically incorrect, at least here in the U.S.) accusation started. I can be wrong but I guess it started when MS quoted a scripture about pride in which Odessa jumped in (I would say quitely but aggressively) and seemingly hit a very sensitive chord in MS's psyche.

I hope they've genuinely patched up now because I can see that both MS and Odessa can contribute a lot positively to the present discussion. Calculating the top 5 ratings for each side involves some work and we have to cite Odessa for that.

So that's my piece. I hope this post would not cause me to be singled out too as I'm just trying to help restore order here as one of the older players. :)

Btw, I can bet confidently that Odessa is a woman, a fine young woman in fact but perhaps in the mold of Hilary Clinton and Sarah Palin. (Wohh, those are strong women political figures, and I should not dwell further than this..and Odessa, I mean that as a compliment).

Thanks to all of you especially to you MainStreet for having the courage to start such a sensitive topic and to those who submitted posts that made sense. I hope that all of us from hereon can learn to agree to disagree and move forward to becoming a positive influence to make this site the best ever! (I'm sure many will agree that the people in the site (not the site's features) is the one that makes it the best.)

Cheers!

Could you explain a bit further? What victory? Why meaningless and pathetic? Is this a touch harsh?

Those are good points! Thank you. Let's learn from them... quickly.

Seriousness is yet another dimension - along with use/non-use of CC-type facilities, attitude towards resignation, tendency to chat, etc. that contribute to a player's personality. I don't consider that even rating is a good indicator of seriousness - much less these other factors.

I adapted this scale from another chess website:

Learning Attitude { Tick one }

( ) Determined to improve at chess

(X) Social player

( ) Serious player

for incorporation into the Extended Personal Profile (described here http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/who-is-player-x ). In my view, the more accurate information we have about our opponent's playing style, the less friction will be caused by Great (unfulfilled) Expectations.

To tell you the thruth boys and girls for I have read books and played against computers to advance my oppenings,tactics,theories....etc,but never while playing in an online game.

That said,if I was playing some one who uses DB's and was unaware of the fact,win or lose I would not mind at all,for does one not learn by ones errors?But if I knew I was playing against a DB player?Then that would effect my playing for I'ld be under pressure,one wrong move and all that!

To DB users expecially the higher ranking ones(top seeds),if I had the chance to play with yous and if I had the chance to have Deep Blue 2(the only computer to beat KASPEROV),yet with out your knowledge,on my side and I kicked your ass(a small seed like me)would you be angry,frustrated.........etc,why a person of over a 1000 points below yours took you ll to the cleaners like a five year old?Respect for is not only a question?regards,

Gabriel & lol!

Quick point of clarification: do you consider the two scenarios (one of which is defined to be against the rules on this site, and the other which is explicitly within the rules on this site) to be equivalent?

Just trying to prove a point your honour!

After Gabriel's question has been answered, here is mine:

If I was driving in a car rally (just using maps) against someone who was using SATELLITE NAVIGATION (that was explicitly allowed in the rules) and I was unaware of the fact (that they were using it), then - win or lose I would not mind at all, for does one not learn by one's errors? But if I knew I was driving against a SATELLITE NAVIGATION user? Then that would affect my driving for I'd be under pressure, one wrong turn and all that!

To SATELLITE NAVIGATION users expecially the higher ranking ones (top seeds): if I had the chance to drive against you and if I had the chance to have Military Level SATELLITE NAVIGATION (that was against the rules of the competition), yet without your knowledge, on my side and I kicked your ass (a small seed-driver like me), would you be angry, frustrated.........etc., why a person of over a 1000 points below yours took you to the cleaners like a five year old? Respect for is not only a question. regards, ArtFizz & lol!

 Careful for if I got my hands on that military level satelite navagation(mpgs)with laser beam included,I think that a lot of people would be ducking and diving forget about the driving!

Databases and books will only take a player so far and are not perfect! Back in the 1980s there was a line in the Sicilian Defence where the book move was Qd2. In 1986 someone discovered Qg3, leading to a nasty attack, and Qd2 fell out of favour. I was still using my old books though and got clobbered once or twice by Qg3 until I realised what had happened. This still happens today although databases tend to catch up quicker than books.

If you played me using Deep Blue 2 on this site then you would be cheating. Deep Blue 2 is not a databse or a book but a chess engine running on specialised hardware. Despite my databuse and book use I would not be cheating since both resources are explicitly permitted by the rules of this site. If you were to play me under ICCF or LSS rules then neither of us would be cheating.

I am not sure I would fear Deep Blue 2. Kasparaov wasn't playing correspondence chess against IBM's monster and I suspect Rybka 3 on a multi-core multi-processor modern PC could thrash Deep Blue 2. If only I had such fancy hardware and software at my disposal!

How I wish there's a player here in Chess.com who'll be so transparent to indicate that anyone who challenges him shall be playing against his chess engine. What a great practice it will be. And I wonder what his rating would be... :)

I played with extensive database usage for the first two years. it taught me a great deal on what kind of moves tend to be good, when to snatch pawns and when not to. intuition. it made my games look more like real games, instead of the patzerish tensionless and infertile collapsed positions I used to have.

then a year ago I stopped using them. and guess what, I didn't drop one point. I had some opening blunders, but not enough to affect my level significantly. my games still look like real games (well most of them anyway), practically nothing changed. I retained everything I learned from dbs, and I'm now a better player for it.

any db-player who got better by using them, will beat the pants off from any significantly lower rated non-user. I've seen & done it countless of times myself. there might be a blunder or two, but as a rule the situation where an optimistic non-user beats a db-user without dbs regularly, it simply never happens. it's a pipe dream, an illusion or an excuse to the laziness of putting in the work that's needed to get better.

as a training method, using dbs (and books) in CC is no different from studying master games. except that you have your game at stake, which makes you focus and thus learn more than from regular master game study.

for some reason there are players who choose not to take on this magnificent chance to get better, and they also suffer the consequences. I'm willing to bet the rating average of non-using players in this thread is hundreds of points lower than the one of db-using ones. even though the db-players probably don't even bother to read these kinds of threads. - in my experience, the non-users tend to be beginners or below average. where as practically all serious high rated payers do use them when necessary.

my advice to all beginners in CC is: you should definitely be working on dbs. it'll improve your game considerably.

That would be a quick way to get banned. I can't see any engine user wanting to admit to cheating in public. Except for the site pet cheat, Cheater_1

There are many things that one could label pathetic.

Great comments, wormstar.

I do think, however, that there is a difference between using all study aids during a CC game and studying a master-level game: in studying a well-played game between GMs, you see best moves played against best moves, for the most part. Since I'm a lower rated player and mostly play against people around the same rating, I find that opening books and databases don't usually get me very far into a game. Generally, fairly early on my opponent will go "out of book."  It's still any interesting learning exercise  --  try to figure out why this move is inferior to the book move, if it is.

This misses the point.

The whole point of using the DB is to get better at the opening phase of the game.

Making yourself a better player is overrated. It should be about the chest thumping, grunting, and general assertion of manliness that goes with beating a lesser being. That way all the cave-chicks will line up just waiting for you to club them on the head and drag them home.

Oddly, I've never found the females to line up when I demonstrate my prowess on the chess board. I must be doing something wrong . . .

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)

Counted up to (and including) post #427.

I don´t use softwares or databases.