Daily Chess is ridiculous

A friend of mine used to do that in the '80s.  Conditional moves were available back then, albeit a little freer in their format and with the ability to see what the conditional moves were before you made yours.

My friend played

1 e4

His opponent played

1 ... b6 (if any) 2 ... Bb7

My friend played

2 Ba6 Bb7 3 Bxb7

Daily trails, in my opinion, are kinda fun. Losing here is better than losing to family!

What I find ridiculous is the daily chess players that have like 150+ games going at once and they make their move with like an hour left. And the accuracy is always high 80s or 90s. it's hard to take them seriously without suspecting cheating. How can you navigate that many games with so many different positions and openings? I have 30 going now and it feels about too much for me.

taking their time is probably why their accuracy is so high!     🙂

i just demolished 20 daily 960 players at once (average rating 831) with over 90% accuracy... not that hard to do when people are blundering pieces left & right to you.

most of the games concluded within a week & the majority of the moves i had little to actually think about... i just stayed solid & took the material that was given to me.

Having that many games going at once might be why they take so long, and said time spent is why they are so accurate. Puzzles are very often made with players having to solve the ideal moves for a given position. Tactics puzzles, openings puzzles, etc. given enough time it should be doable. 

I used to play postal chess. Then the computer cheaters (lifetime USCF rating in 1300s but suddenly playing like a GM in postal) ruined it. I would use the games often to explore lines that came from books where the writer says something like "Bb4!? here might be interesting" and then I'd try it out. Before massive databases, this took everyone out of the longer analysis and threw them onto their own resources.

I never managed to get in to the Daily thing but one thing I know is that it's respected and it can be useful to learn from Daily games even if you don't play them.

GM Wesley So cites correspondence games to something that shapes his view on cutting edge theory (rather than "classic stuff").

So maybe... Don't play these games but check out others games?... 

Perhaps "newly developed theory" is more relevant for 2000s+ but idk i find it interesting

So far I've played 1000 Rossolimo games and never managed to get this bishop on d6 because no one at my level plays e5 in a Sicilian (needed for this pawn sac...) but maybe one day  

I play daily predominantly, but agree that accessing theory with the game in progress is extremely bad form. I used to play by correspondence back in the day, and never heard anyone say it was ok to consult texts mid-game, in fact organisers would specifically state it was considered cheating, although apparently it's technically been within the rules all that time. I only learned that from chess.com last year! The absurd thing is that it IS illegal, and always has been, to consult anyone else about an 'in progress' game, but it's OK to check Opening Explorer to see what Fisher or Lasker or Carlson would recommend. Lol. The issue is the definition of a 'chess engine.' It should be expanded to include 'database.' I find it difficult to imagine sitting around playing a rated game, and just copying moves of masters against unsuspecting opponents. I suppose some people do though... What would be the point? what IS fake flex?!? 

I was under the impression that an on-line opening explorer was even more limited than the opening books that people used to be able to use freely during correspondence.  If gives percentage of White/Black wins or draws rather than position evaluations..  For that matter, traditional correspondence players were assumed to be using endgame books as well.

One reason it couldn't be banned was because it was impossible to prove whether or not a player merely knew an opening or endgame or was using a book (I've heard of other arbiters that have seen 1300-level players properly demonstrate the K+B+N vs K ending over the board (for their own amusement they studied it).

Banning the use of such readily available opening or endgame books was impossible to enforce and would only affect those that obeyed such a ban.  Engine use during the middle game (and the more complex endgames) is more detectable thus can be reasonably expected to be enforceable.

That said, there are correspondence organizations that allow engine use (primarily because it is difficult to prove) and the top level players in such organizations are those that use the engines more for blunder-checking of their positional play and are able to readily defeat players that blindly follow the engine recommendations (engines are tactical demons but subject to occasional positional blindness).

https://www.chess.com/club/bright-suns be sa

I agree with point 3. Especially players who enter a tournament on daily chess, make three moves over 9 days and then lose on time. I like daily chess because its the only format where the server hasn't screwed me 2 mins from the end of a two hour match where I was about to win. Anyway, I have a DGT Centaur now, and that's my favourite headache at the moment. 

I don't mind if my opponents use opening books or even engines - because their ratings reflect this. If I am playing someone with the same rating as me - and who (unbeknownst to me) uses books and engines - I still have 50% chances and it will be a good game.

I choose not to use B&E in daily chess because I think it will hamper my learning.

You do not like daily chess? That's perfectly fine. But who are you to tell us what real chess is and what it is not?