No opening consultation even for Daily rated games.

I think the only time Opening consultation should be allowed is for unrated games.

The argument seems to be in real life that in correspondence Chess you can look at Opening material. I doubt they are rated games. 

I have been told you are only allowed to look at Opening material for the 1st 8 moves only, but how many people know that? If a player goes to the ninth move doing this, who is going to find out?

It is time to make this simpler. Unrated daily Chess Opening consultation should be allowed and rated Daily Chess, it shouldn't be allowed at all. Those are my thoughts.

Then it would be easier to catch the buggers cheating from move 1.

You might want to get your facts straight. I played correspondence chess. They were rated games. You were allowed to look at opening books.

Chess.com told me by email that it is only to move 8 you are allowed to look at Opening material. 

My argument is I don't think it should be allowed at all if the game is rated. 

Who told you that? I don't see any reference to 8 moves in the site's terms of service. It just says that opening books and databases are allowed in correspondence games. 

Also, why do you think it shouldn't be allowed?

Utter nonsense.,

Referencing opening theory has ALWAYS been a part of correspondence play. It remains an integral aspect of play. Want to regulate players studying book moves ? Hogwash. 

The so-called "argument" is without merit. Besides the fact no evidence is presented that it is harmful to the spirit of the game. Don't like what has been the standard for 100"s of years? Don't play.

CC told you no such thing about "8 moves only." The OP simply made this up.

The OP's reference to "cheating" is again, without merit. Correspondence players, I can emphatically state after 50 years of play, are far more honest in their play than online live players, regardless of the time control. It is a "myth", perpetuated out of ignorance and assumptions, that correspondence players use an engine "because it is easy to do." Rubbish.

Cheating is a character issue. It is false to make the assumption any player would cheat if they thought they would not get caught or it is easy to do.  Correspondence players overwhelmingly exhibit fair play. The main goal is self improvement, taking time to make an analysis on your own time. The use of an engine does not enter the minds of most all CC players. The End

This rule practicaly cannot be enforced. Also there isn't such thing like "you are only allowed to look at Opening material for the 1st 8 moves only". I have one line in Najdorf in my personal database that is 53 moves long and lead to winning endgame for white.I may use it completly legaly if someone enters this line.

Amelia from Chess.com told me up to move 8 by email you can consult opening material. Those emails are from March 2018. 

Are you saying pre-computer correspondence Chess was rated and you were allowed to still use Opening material? I just don't see any sense in it at all as some of the game isn't yours. If an unrated game you should be able to do what you want.

Yes, referencing opening theory via books has ALWAYS been a part of correspondence chess. Since day One. Amelia is misinformed.

The Sense.... is self improvement.

On the question of cheating, how come my grandmaster online coach keeps complaining there are loads of cheaters on chess.com, especially when it comes to slow play?  Cheating isn't confined to engine assistance, it could be sandbagging or more than 1 person playing on the account or in 1 game.

Titled-patzer. Are you saying for rated games in the past too? I just don't see the point however traditional it may be.

Unrated correspondence, I would totally agree. Plenty of time for self improvement when it is unofficial. 

How many cheaters there are, I do not know. But your "coach" is ill-informed by making the assumption that the longer time controls results in more cheaters. This is false.

As I said, it is a character issue. The length of the game or the opportunities presented are not relevant. If a player is inclined towards such behavior, they will do it no matter the time control. It is just as "easy" for engine use at bullet as any other time control. 

It is Wrong to assume longer games results in more engine use. As I stated, from 50 years of experience, correspondence players, on the hole, exhibit a far greater sense of fair play.

OP, you do know that correspondence games can last weeks and sometimes months, right? That's a long time to not be able to read any opening books.

It takes a mighty dim view to assume that opportunity presented results in players automatically  choosing to compromise their character. 

As far as understanding the "sense" of allowing the use of opening books, that could take some time. Perhaps you need to play a few years before passing judgement. 

1 reason for playing rated correspondence Chess is because people don't have time to have a normal live rated game. By all means, as I said before, if you select an unrated game then I have no problem with Opening material as only practice.

Cheating more likely in slow play in my view is because if you take nearly 24 hours to make a move, for example it is hard for the cheat detection to say he or she moved too quickly to be an own effort.

Also when does an Opening move not become an Opening move any longer assuming there is no 8 move rule after all? It seems surprising one of their staff wouldn't know such a thing, but anything is possible. 

I must admit I was also surprised about the 8 move rule as I never remembered seeing it either. I have always been reluctant to use any material at all.

"In Daily Chess (turn-based games with several days per move), you may consult any resource which is not engine-based. This includes books, opening databases (including the Chess.com Explorer) for [www.chess.com/openings|opening moves], and thematic game"

It is clear, you can consult books and databases