I don't use databases or books, but thats mostly because I mostly play games leisurely. Its definitely legit, as long as someone isn't abusing some chess engine, I really don't see anything wrong. *shrugs*
A TALLY OF DATABASE-USERS & NON-USERS
Sort:
I only got my Brain and the Analysis Board. : )
ADK
I do not use databeses, books, etc. I respect the decision to use them, I personally just work better without them. Not to say that my moves are better than database moves (because they are far worse), but my moves are what I understand and work best with. I also find it more fun to use my own moves. I will, very occasionally refresh my memory on the first few lines of an opening if I feel like playing it but forget or don't know how.
Sep 9, 2008
0
#65
I am afraid my all too frequent questionable moves are evidence I don't use resources to help. For study, yes, but for play, particularly in tournaments, no.
No wonder my ratings are in the toilet and i always get my ass kicked. where do i get these databases?
There's a perfectly decent one available right here on chess.com. It's called the "game explorer"
You can also google "chess openings" and it will take you to a bunch. The one here is the best I've seen tho. ChessOps.com and Wikipedia.com won't give you winning percentage numbers like the databases do, but it explains the logic behind each of the options which is even more important.
Sharukin wrote:
I use whatever is allowed within the rules of the site I am playing on. Here, I will use a database I have assembled myself and any books I have to hand. When playing ICCF games or on sites with similar (lack of) rules I will use the database and books and also my ancient Mac running a varity of engines.
What he said.
Did you ever meet a coach in any sport who would field one less player because he didnt think it was right to use all that the rules allowed?
Silly there and silly here.
and its equally, or even more silly, to use such resources as a crutch whenever you find yourself in an unusual opening. Pity such the person who uses anything other than his brain as a crutch in chess.
Mebeme wrote:
ericmittens, ever thought some people dont live within 40 miles of a chess club? less tournaments here too.
you never answered my question.
In terms of seeing databases and the like as a crutch... that really depends on how you use them... a player that just quickly goes to game explorer find the highest win % move enter it and move on is not even playing the game.
But the more I think about it the more I like the term crutch - I'm no expert and in many ways my chess thinking is faulty. Databases help teach me to think smarter much like a pair of prescription shoes can correct poor posture in a child. The child COULD have corrected their posture without them... of course they could also have developed a horrible hunchback and a limp. I see playing correspondence chess and using databases as stopping my chess skills from getting a hunchback and a limp. Its certainly a lot cheaper than a chess tutor.
Sep 9, 2008
0
#73
spurg wrote: No wonder my ratings are in the toilet and i always get my ass kicked. where do i get these databases?
There is another topic - running in parallel with this one ( http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/using-books--databases-for-playing-turn-based ). You may find it instructive.
[Edit:
I didn't like the wording of my argument. I am a non-user, but I don't see anything wrong with taking advantage of everything that is allowed. Working to learn is cool, and I wish I had the discipline.
I think one's desire for involvement can flicker, shift. I think obsessions can change shape.
Non-user only by time constraint and capability of commitment.
Evil_Homer wrote:
Olimar wrote:
and its equally, or even more silly, to use such resources as a crutch whenever you find yourself in an unusual opening. Pity such the person who uses anything other than his brain as a crutch in chess. Let me see then. I'm driving a car and suddenly I find myself on ice, my passenger is an experienced ice driver and says "let me help", but you say "no, the only way I'll learn is to crash and burn". Ha, i'm glad I don't insure your car.
first of all... that was just about the worst analogy I could possibly think of.
Unlike driving, in chess we learn form our mistakes. ANY grandmaster would 100% agree with this statement. pure experience is one fo the reasons why they are so good. They have made so many mistakes from their lifetime of chess playing that they have learned not to make them again. In fact, your analogy was so bad I am wondering if we are talking about the same game... it is chess right? The game where EVERYONE studies their lost games and reviews the mistakes they make. I would shudder to think of the person who is so scared to never lose a game that they dont take risks. (which, of course, is the exact opposite of driving)
Sep 9, 2008
0
#76
Non-user. I let what little knowledge I have on openings, endgame theory and tactics decide my moves. Plus some spontaneous bizarre moves to mix things up for fun. When I finish a game, I go through it and figure out how I lost or won. That's how you improve. Forget about what rules the website posts or doesn't post regarding softwares or databases. The important question is: why bother doing it? What's enjoyable about letting a computer or textbook make your moves for you? What have you gained from it other than a higher rating?
Anyway, I won't resent my opponents for doing these things on routine games, but they shouldn't be used in tournaments.
Sep 9, 2008
0
#78
a.) Just to clarify, the use of databases is in no way cheating. both players are allowed to use it. Software is soo much different from books and the game database. With Chess Software, the player really doesn't play anymore(the computer does... which is bad), but using a legit aid actually takes proper application. Who cares if your opponent know 20 moves into the Ruy lopez when he doesn't know jack squat on how to continue after.
b.) Database help should be considered a "good" thing about correspondence chess, allowing us to learn while we are playing a game; think of it as hands-on training. Without it, correspondence chess would be nothing more that a reeeally long game of chess... game 120 anyone?
c.) Using the database doesn't mean you're gonna win. Its laughable to see people blaming their losses on the opponent using a chess game database when they probably lost from a blunder or a strategic mistake. If you play solid moves, an opening can't beat you, you're doing something else wrong; worst case scenario is that you're opponent gets his "theoretical plus", which isn't exactly bad either since it gives you practice for OTB games against booked-up opponents.
d.) One issue I've seen is that people feel it's unfair that an opponent can see through his "opening traps", and well... GET OVER IT. Better players will never fall for silly opening traps, so it'll be good to practice what happens if they "know". ok ok ok, takes out all the fun out the game, huh? Frankly, I personally wouldn't feel good trying to win games via a silly trap (all you'd get is rating...)
e.) Why strain your memory when you don't have to? The materials there, why ignore it and try to stretch your brain(memory) in a game that allows the help. Of course, you could argue that you would not understand the material if you just "use" it, and well... WTF!? thats not the database's fault, thats the fault of the person using the database. Learn from the aid, understand it during the game, don't scorn it.
f.) I don't see why people keep comparing using aid to real quizzes and such, which makes it seem like cheating. Correspondence chess is really like open book quizzes; its a learning experience, and its up to the quiz takers whether or not they will apply what they learned for bigger (non-note) tests. Not using aid in correspondence chess is like trying to memorize info for an open book quiz... which is fine, but don't scoff at the one's who decide to use their notes. One could also compare Corr. Chess to a research paper; you wouldn't create it with the information you have when it's assignned, right? no, that'll be a low quality paper; you're allowed to work on it at home, using information from other sources, to raise the quality of the paper, and like in corr. chess the aid should be seen as a way to elevate one's game, not as something "unfair".
User
MainStreet wrote:
So far: 21 Users, 20 Non-users.
Are you counting Duffer1965 as one of us - or one of them? He comes across as a practicing non-user to me - though without any ideological bias against becoming a user!