A TALLY OF DATABASE-USERS & NON-USERS

What will it take to get this topic over 1000 posts?

As of 10/19/08: (* in rated games)

Users - 87, Non-Users -106

i have a good opening knowledge of the lines i am likely to be playing. It's not that often an OTB opponent will 'out-book' me, but i have noticed recently (ever since the game explorer was introduced here) my opponents were really testing my opening knowledge. There have been times where i have assumed my opponent is using reference material, so have done the same, but it is not the norm.

On a separate point, are endgame tablebases permitted too?

Endgame tablebases are explicitly banned. Since they are they output from an engine it would be the same as consulting an engine during play and that is also banned. Databases are not the output of an engine (contrary to popular opinion) but are instead just collections of games.

So, would you submit yourself as a User or Non-User?

 I'll make one more.

But but was already counted long ago. The last tabulation was in post #812  (http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/a-tally-of-database-users--non-users?page=41). It has reached the limit of a formatted table on chess.com. Any bigger than this and it tends to corrupt the entire discussion.

The front page survey (derived from this discussion) produced more polarised results: 33% User vs. 67% Non-User. A point of interest is what proportion of the 24% who were not using through lack of awareness would subsequently decide to become users?

A further point is that many people don't use databases because it is not convenient to do so. Even Game Explorer is a bit of a chore to use. One of the suggestions on the Wishlist was closer integration between the standard board and Game Explorer. If there was a one-click button taking you straight into Game Explorer from the current position, imagine how its use would rocket.

Do you use opening databases, books or other reference materials when playing turn-based correspondence chess (e-chess)?

• Yes. (33%)
• No. (43%)
• I didn't know that using that stuff was allowed.(14%)
• What's an opening database? (10%)

Very interesting... I am not sure how comforting this is. Maybe we should utilize the system that you and Mainstreet use to let each other know if we are a user or non user / resigns or not / chat or no chat...

I would like to know before I play if that person is using.

For me, although the numbers are of great interest, more insightful are the comments. Thus, this thread continues...

As corrected:

As of 10/22/08: (* in rated games)

Users - 86, Non-Users -106

It depends how comfortable I am with the opening and what the rating of the opponent is.

If and only if I am seriously outclassed, I will use the database and books.

I use both books and databases all the time. Because using databases actually does help me improve: by looking variations down the line I can get to know the openings I'm playing better. Also I was very surprised when I saw how few people actually use the database. I thought that as research is supposed to be a big aspect of CC, why are people choosing it instead of live chess if they are only going to handicap themsleves by choosing to ignore such options? That is presuming they have not already memorised vast opening lines.. Also if you want to improve and not just play for pure fun, accept that you must read books.

As of 10/22/08: (* in rated games)

Users - 87, Non-Users -106

As of 10/22/08: (* in rated games)

Users - 88, Non-Users -106

I think a couple more useless comments from the gab and numerous frustrated replies will put us over the top.  I must say I'm surprised at the numbers but my play continues to improve despite my extremely minimal use of game explorer.  I no longer use my opening book because I seem to have memorized all of the useful aspects of it.  No disrespect to non-users. i think there is valid purpose to that sort of play.

Anthony

As many users (and some non-users) have indicated: having access to Game Explorer or the Analysis Board is more a state of mind than an actual practice. I use these once in a blue moon but the key point is: they are in my toolkit and I could use them any time I chose.

The proposed Extended Personal Profile  (http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/who-is-player-x) and Essential Chess Type (http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/its-another-rollover) merely indicate your ideology i.e. whether you consider these tools legitimate/appropriate or not. They don't indicate whether you'll be using them in any particular game against any particular opponent.

Ideally, on Open Seeks (and Challenges), if there was a set of tick boxes: open to DB use, open to Analysis Board use, might Chat, might Resign, etc. (and these settings were picked up by default from your putative Extended Personal Profile), THEN you could indicate on a per game basis:

• what you require in your opponent
  
• what you intend to do yourself
  
• or both.

Artfizz I think that you have a good idea going with this... 

Remind me again: does everyone who posted get a T-shirt when a discussion reaches 1000 posts?

And the T-shirt says: "User-Non-user.com"

I want that shirt.. heheh