Philosophical question about Cheating...

I'm playing, on another server, some correspondence games with some friends. Now the rules for USCF, like for chess.com, are (if I understood them well) that I can use any database, or book, but I cannot use computer assistance.

I'm not using computer assistance, but today I realized that my database is huge, because I have more than 7 million games (more than 200thousand are about my own lines!), and the fact is that I used engines to play all the opening lines I play, and store them in my own database.

Now one of the friends I'm playing with entered in one of the lines the engines played of my own opening repertoire.

My question is that I will win, because the engines are quite high level, and maybe I will be accused of cheating, because I'm not really thinking about the moves, but just making a search of the position if it happened before in my database, and using the result.

Now, I have stuff that is not published in books, but which would be played by engines. And I cannot understand how could I avoid to be labeled as a cheater, when I'm using the product of engines. Especially in case my friend continue in the same line for the next 20 moves (What are the odds that someone would play 40 moves like an engine not being an engine, but just using a database?), and I already know he is going to lose, because another engine lost.

I also don't see the reason to deviate, because I honestly believe the engine played well.

@OP: This topic should take place only in the Cheating Forum. Please join this group:

http://www.chess.com/groups/home/cheating-forum

and post your topic there. Discussions of cheating are not permitted in the general forums.

sshhhhh you risk to speak of the huge pink elephant in the living room!

What does OP stand for?

Let's assume your database contained all possible "best move" deviations (inferior move responses by opponents) because hey, your prep-work with the engine was so exhaustive that you wanted to leave no stone unturned.

Your "database" could sub for an engine (as you describe) enough to win games consistently where there is literally no "analysis" by you : the human player ... and it's all just a perfect "look up table".

 It appears you've solved chess.

A few hundred computer scientists and engine programmers would probably want to have a word with you and that timemachine you've been meddling with.

If you used computer assistance to create your database, it's not a stretch to say you're cheating by relying on moves in the database. As far as I know, the databases on other chess websites (don't know about the one on here) are databases developed from games of mid- to high-rated players on the website

Aren't databases made up of engine games typically off-limits, too?

I think this is more a question of ethics than the "philosophical".  Ethics being more close to the moral line of what is right or wrong.  An idea which seems to be rapidly disappearing from our society.

Let me put it this way.  If you think you're cheating, then you are cheating.  Screw the engines.  If you need a database to navigate an unfamliar opening, fine.  But at some point you have to "man up" and put YOUR brain in the game.

If you like being a parrot and you can sleep at night, keep it up and be proud of your win.  What's the point in having a giant database like that?  To prove you can use a database?

IMO, you should use your mind only for all games. It stresses more originality and creativity.  I like to think of chess as an excellent free thinking exercise.

No database holds every position and every move possible and the "exact right" move in every position. One day humans might reach that point, but we're far from it.

So you're going to hit points where opponents go off of your database.

However, I would say that if your whole goal is to use a computer to make an exhaustive database so you never have to think about a move but can win correspondence chess then:

1) You are certainly entering a grey area on cheating

2) Really need another hobby because what the hell would the point of playing in the first place be?

I believe the topic is interesting, and the title should be a philosophical thought experiment.

@shivsky: for the king's gambit, it seems has already been done, read the chessbase article, a guy used multiprocessors and made a database after 6 months of analysis, with the best reply for white. He didn't publish the database, which means he is trying to sell it to some GMs.

@chesssponge: ask any GM why they are playing, since Carlsen, Kramnik, or even the legendary Kasparov all used computers to discover new ideas. Roman uses Rybka. And when they win, they do it for money.

@Overclockedpebrain: the same answer given to chesssponge, all GMs use computers and databases to win games for money. So why are they playing? Since the difference between Carlsen and the others, is just that he memorized more of his database in his brain. The same for Kasparov, he retired when he started to confuse some lines he learned like a parrot from his famous opening database, the one he sells for thousand of dollars to the other GMs.

Again, I believe this question is very interesting, since like other people pointed out most books are engine checked, so is someone cheating using books?

@carlito, using computer to find new lines and try them out then going into a game and playing what you used your head to memorize and playing the resulting positions when they've gone off line or beyond the line is a LOT different then playing correspondence chess with a theoretical complete database so you never have to think, only look in a database and enter the next move.

If your sole purpose is just to push buttons - do it. BUT - if you want to play chess and experience the challenge of finding the best move that the position offers - win or loose - you can get real enjoyment. Just pushing buttons must be boring.

There is much more to correspondence chess than using a large data base and entering your move from that base.  Players who do this in a high level correspondence chess tournament will lose more than they will win.

I don't think you have any worry.  The game will not stay in your data-base for more than a few moves after you leave book theory, because your opponents will not play like a computer.   The fact is that computers are pretty poor at opening theory.

In before the lock.

That's all well and good but you're not Carlsen or Kasparov.

Cheating is using any source other than your brain. I occasionally plug in positions into chessmaster and play different computer opponents until I can figure out how to win. This is almost always possible for me to beat any computer when I am up in material unluss my position is just horrible. I rarely ever encounter a human player that plays like the computer. One time I did. He played every move chessmaster did for like the last 25 moves of our game. I won that game. His position was already lost after a blunder. So ... ALWAYS USE YOUR OWN BRAIN! NEVER USE A DATABASE TO COME UP WITH A MOVE UNLESS YOU ARE A CHEATER!