Game Explorer and Cheating

I sure have been wondering about this - I *love* this feature but at the same time I worry about people abusing it against me - The way that I use it is, I study lines that I usually find myself playing, and I like to see how masters (or this community too) respond in similar situations. What I do NOT do is look at a specific position that I'm in currently in any of my games. Opening Explorer OR Game Explorer - that feels like cheating to me. Is that wrong? Texaspete - I appreciate your first post and how you explained yourself. It didn't sound arrogant at all to me.

But - it sounds like what I just described isn't considered abuse anyway, so...  Anyway, not a big deal, but it's an interesting debate I think.

No, using the Explorer in the way you described is not cheating, nor is anyother way. Part of the thing to remember is that using a database incorrectly can actually be detrimental. I don't want to get into the specifics right now, but there are wrong ways to use a database. This is part of the reason that it is considered ok to use, because it will not always yeild the best move, or even a GOOD move.

Everyone has expressed valid points of view.  When I first played Correspondence Chess all I had were a few resources and time and care was needed to research lines.  Now we can have 3 million plus games on tap and we can search them quickly in all sorts of ways 'though a little care is still needed.  Chess computers do this in their opening moves.

Databases are undoubtably a boon for learning if used properly but what about the future?  Will we see Chessbase with 50 million games instead of a few million?  What new features will these databases have?  I don't think that we have a big problem at the moment but we may be walking into one.

may be i am old school , but i thought chess playing is about learning with out help,

you learn from your mistakes, abit like life ,

Yeah, I noticed players with very low ratings, open quite strongly with solid opening moves, but after the opening is out of book, their game deteriorates rapidly.

I consider it cheating to use chess engines or any help DURING the game. If he/she tells me up front that they will be using help during the game. I then decline the game. As some previous posters have mentioned, I am not interested in playing against their library or a computer. I do not use them DURING a game. Afterwards I check a reference to see if the game could have gone better in the opening.

Referencing an opening explorer is a great way to learn the openings as you play them. While I may have avoided some pitfalls - I don't think I've ever gained a "winning advantage" by using a Dbase. Sooner or later someone makes a move that takes the game out of book. Then you are on your own. Another consideration is that the moves found in an Opening explorer are the "most popular" moves and not necessarily the best or the only continuation of a line. Some lines - thought to be losers - are later found to be sound... and vice versa.

i'm playing a game against a 900 rated player, who is copying from the game explorer moves, and that realy sucks, they should have a limitation on the game explorer that you could see only the opening stages of the game, and have the games library put apart, so people wouldn't copy the moves till the end.

 The reality is that this just doesn't happen. Ive been using DBs for a long time (I have one that has about four million games, and another with more than five), and for a game to go into the 16th move in a DB is EXTREMELY rare. Once both players reach the tabiya position of whatever opening line they are in, using a DB becomes very unreliable. Do you really want to trust your DB when out of five million games, you only have ten where a specific position has been reached? If you do, you have a lot more faith in databases than I do.

Please note, once you get into the endgame, many database programs turn into "tablebase" mode, or whatever the specific program calls it. But basically, there are specific endgame positions where when moves are made in a specific way, the outcome is certain. Using tablebases at chess.com is NOT allowed. DB programs serve no legal purpose in the end game.

 as has been said previously, the games explorer takes you only so far. then you must rely on your own skill. it is unlikely that the player will be able to follow the whole game through to the end using the games explorer

 My recommendation would be to try to find a "bad" move in the GE somewhere upcoming in your line. Im sure that if you dig a bit, you can find somewhere where a refutation to a move has been found later or something like that so the first move listed on the DB screen is actually a bad one. Try to find this, and teach the 900 level player why relying solely on DBs like that can be a bad idea.

If u wanna play OTB style chess without rigid time constraints,eg. game in 2 hrs, Join the circle of trust and adhere to the groups rules if like me u think using external aids during the game is unsportsmanlike....

however for the correspondence chess thoroughbred, I do understand that it is perfectly normal and to an extent accepted to use some help....

thats my two pence.

am out

Perhaps it would be a good idea if there was a specific space on our chess.com profiles to specify what reference aids we each use/consider appropriate in our games.

 For myself I do use the explorer in the opening, and have no qualms about doing so. I'm coming back to chess after a long break, and frankly my knowledge of openings was never anything but narrow even before. Rather than flounder horribly in unfamiliar openings, I think I will learn quicker by looking up what the most common responses are to a given position and considering what each one has to recommend it. I then mostly get to play a line that I am likely to encounter again.

 I think of it as like an expert sitting at my shoulder, suggesting "have you considered this move? or this one?", and sometimes responding to my proposed move with a raised eyebrow and a quiet "are you quite sure you want to do that?"

 After all, my opponent has the same expert sitting at his/her shoulder too, and the option of whether to consult or not.

I also use the Analysis Board a lot, and this I do have a concern about. Not a moral concern, but purely in practical terms. I'm sure that using it makes me lazy when it comes to visualising positions several moves ahead and this will prove a disadvantage if I want to get back into OTB play. In-depth analysis is good of course and this tool makes it easier, but visualisation is vital too and over-reliance on the Analysis Board may well hamper the development of that skill. I wonder what others think of this.

 To be honest, I'm not really sure, but it's been a part of "slow" chess for as far back as I can find evicence for it. Ever since people started playing postal chess, which eventually evolved into the turn-based chess we have now, research type assistance has been allowed.

Definately cheating.  They should declare what they are doing and if anyone declared it to me I would not accept another challange from them.  Perhaps there should be game categories.

1. Basic Stuff. For those who have not read any book and does not use the tools mentioned above. It includes me though I must admit to have used tactics trainer.

2. Cheating Allowed. For those who use opening databases or books etc. during a game and their oponents recognise and accept this.

3. Serious Stuff.  Those who study, or have studied, chess seriously.

I'm sure you will tear this proposal to shreds.