One of the most frustrating things about daily chess...

You have a black dog and I have a black cat.

when you lose 10 matches in a row because of this

I'm fairly certain that the "Analysis" feature (not engine) which can be accessed by the 'Magnifying Glass" 🔍 icon below the moves on right side of board is not a premium feature and is not cheating.

If you are not using it and others are you are at a dssadvantge, it's allowed in the rules as is the "Explorer" feature (chess.com's Opening Database) or why else are they accessable from the Daily Chess game's page. If you still uncertain you should read rules poseted by @lostpawn247 https://support.chess.com/en/articles/8583921-what-counts-as-cheating-on-chess-com

Yes, since the Analysis feature and Explorer Opening Database feature are directly accessible from the Daily Chess game's page, they are allowed and not cheating. However, because I am not a Premium member, I cannot save anything I might do on the Analysis board. It clearly says: "Upgrade to save" after any move is made. The option to save one's analysis is a Premium feature.

Oh wow really. I actually totally didnt realise that, i'm sorry. I have gold membership, its not too expensive but even still, as long as you can use the Analysis mode, compare prospective lines, Promote or move them down, then its still really helpful and should be exploited.

Perhaps you could screenshot it and return later and copy it back in. It's annoying i know but if you are really not planning to be paid member then that might be the solution 🤷‍♂️

That's not how it works. When I was around 1300 elo Daily strong, and I found out about that, I thought the same as you did. The reality is games from other players are far from perfect and contain errors.

Not to mention - and I found out myself - getting a database such as the chessbase database is useless for Daily chess. If you try to copy moves from a GM game, the only moves which may match are the opening moves, which already have been 100% documented and studied for literally over a century, so meh.

After the opening phase, you are going to very quickly realise when your 1500 elo player, who is not FIDE 2600 strong, plays a move that does not make sense, every single one of your GM games are not going to match his move, and you will be left empty handed 3 or 4 moves after book.

On the other hand if you take a liking to game databases, you can learn a lot by going through the games and seeing how others played similar positions, or trying to find the ideas behind a position (like, what the weaknesses are, how the other players attacked it, or where it's more convenient to attack in this and that position, etc). Which is knowledge you can then apply to your Daily games.

Correspondence chess has a very different history and tradition from OTB chess, and some of the differences in the rules are sometimes surprising to those who are used to OTB chess.

Research has always been part of the correspondence game going back to long before the computer era. Correspondence players would use books, collections of historical games, and hours at the analysis board to help them play at as high of a level as possible. This is how the correspondence game was expected to be played.

Computerised databases are just the modern equivalent of those old printed collections of historical games. Books - we have more now, but they've been part of correspondence chess for as long as correspondence chess has been played.

In fact, when engines first showed up on the scene, they were just another tool you could use to help you double-check your calculations to play at a high level. And up until about 20 years ago, a strong player could still play top-level correspondence without an engine and compete at the very top of the game.

ICCF, the federation for correspondence chess, still allows engines, although ICCF events are now approaching draw death.

Chess.com's daily chess is intended to bring back some of the history and culture of correspondence chess from the pre-engine era, while also catering to those who want to play a casual game in a flexible format that fits their schedule.

This is why books and databases such as the Opening Explorer are permitted in daily chess: research has always been part of correspondence chess. The old correspondence masters would be shocked at the idea of banning books or databases from the correspondence game. Research is an integral part of that form of the game.

Meanwhile, live chess is largely meant to follow the rules of OTB chess, and therefore no resources of any kind are permitted. You are not allowed to refer to a book during a live game just as you are not allowed to refer to a book during an OTB tournament.

Neither set of rules is "better". You may personally prefer one over the other, but that doesn't make the other wrong.

Claiming that using books or databases in correspondence chess is cheating is like claiming that everyone should be on foot in the Tour de France and that riding a bike is cheating.

You may prefer a foot race, but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with a bike race. You may prefer the OTB game where research is not permitted, but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the correspondence game where research is intentionally a major part of the game.

It gets amplified by vacation time too.

I get beat by some 1200 🤣 very unusual and strange

And people never move

No. You know what it's like. Correspondence chess is like Tour de France, where I am driving the bike, sweating my pants and someone disabled overtakes me on a motorbike, waving at me and yelling at me that I didn't read the rules.

What's your dog's name?

I am not allowed to share my dog's name with strangers without his consent. Sorry

Research is literally how correspondence chess is intended to work. It's always been part of the game.

Just as using the assistance of a bike is literally how the Tour de France is intended to work.

Or just as using the assistance of a motorbike is literally how the Isle of Man TT is intended to work.

Showing up to a foot race and riding a bike is cheating. Showing up to the Tour de France with a motorbike is cheating. There's nothing wrong with the bike race or the motorbike race - they're just different events with different rules.

Similarly, correspondence chess is a different event from OTB chess and has different rules - and has had different rules for as long as people have been playing correspondence chess.

So long as you are following the rules for the event you are participating in, you are not cheating.

You do not have to like the rules of every event. If you don't like the concept of research during a game, you may decide that correspondence chess is not for you. Or you can follow your preferred rules and accept the fact that your opponent may not, voluntarily handicapping yourself, like someone trying to run in the Tour de France instead of riding a bike because they think a foot race is the purest form of competition.

But it's not fair to accuse people who are playing correspondence chess of cheating simply for playing correspondence chess in the manner it has been played for centuries.

I saw daily correspondence chess as a chess game before this discussion, that's why this misunderstanding on my behalf even happened, that's also why I assumed that people using books and engines cheat. Now when people helped me to understand how things are I can say that correspondence chess is simply just a fun variant of chess. There's nothing else I'd like to add, all is crystal clear to me now.

Another reason to play daily is that you maybe slow and old.

Correspondence chess is still a chess game. It's just a chess game with different rules. If you don't like those rules, fair enough, but that doesn't mean there's anything inherently wrong or inferior about those rules.

I play on chess.com because of daily and puzzles.