Using Books & Databases for Playing Turn Based.

LOB wrote: Maybe another forum to see peoples preference. cc or otb?

This other topic http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/a-tally-of-database-users--non-users is counting something.

artfizz wrote: Ultimately, we reach the nub of the discussion: on this site, OTB-style chess and correspondence-style chess look superficially so similar that many people are not aware of the EXISTENCE of two forms.

Amen!!  Perfectly stated!!  As far as which one is "Real" I have to say "Both."  They have slightly different rules, and slightly different purposes, but I would never want to do one exclusively over the other.  However, since my CC games have helped improve my OTB games, and not the other way around, I would say that OTB feels more real, and CC feels more like a training exercise.  But I also like the argument that CC's lack of time restrictions (originally anyway, they're back for the new online version) is a "purer" form of chess because it allows both individuals the opportunities for the deepest thought.

And as we have said, if the player is merely regurgitating what their book or database is telling them, then they are missing out on the greatest value of CC chess which is the opportunity for deeper thought.

I use MCO for openings I don't know and databases every now and then. But I don't just blindly copy moves GM's make. If I don't understand why a GM made a certain move I won't play that move. I find that when I just copy moves from a database and don't understand the reasoning behind it I end up in a postion I don't understand and lose.

After reading the many responses on this subject , I must say I didn't have a clue what CC is.  I can see your points and I feel Gonnosuke expressed it well.

"Having access to more information doesn't diminish the competition or the competitors in any way.  Having access to more information doesn't turn you into Anand.  In fact, having access to more information doesn't do much of anything....unless you know how to properly synthesize the information and use it to your advantage!  It's a skill like any other skill and it is what defines successful correspondence chess players."

Could chess could be organised into a range of effort categories (as chess-boxing is?) to ensure a fair fight?

one point that has not been part of this discussion is that OTB chess uses many of the same types of tools in preparation. any serious competition, the better players research their likely opponents tendencies in openings, position, piece selection and whatever other information that that is available. is it not true that before world champion matches that they spend months solely dedicated to preparing for an opponent? not to consider the years that they spend studying each other. it is not available on a move by move basis (wait...wasnt there a grandmaster famous for frequent "bathroom" breaks?) and that appears to be the gist of the discussion.

at the end of the day, if your opponent is using the tools, then how exactly does it affect you? you lose a few ratings points that you would otherwise have? you get smarter (if you learn) by playing better positions? others ratings are inflated? even if they are it is only to a certain generally low level because you cannot really play a competent game with some understanding of the game since the positions that occur are not in databases or books (by the way how does someone find a position in book if they dont already know it beyond an opening?) 

i imagine that the people who worry about what their opponent uses in chess also complain that they were born to circumstances that did not let them achieve their full potential or gave others unfair advantages in life. at the end of the day take responsibility for yourself and enjoy what you are doing.

by the way, at levels less than 1700 here, i can say that very few people are either using any of the tools available or have some really defective information in their hands. while there have been a couple of games that i think a chess program may have been involved just because of the dramatic change in play, the games still have been fun for me. for whatever reason the board still has 64 spaces and the pieces moved the same.

It's clear that everyone has the own position on the issue of database usage - as should they be entitled too. So I think that it is fair to say that it is legal now, it will probably remain legal in CC until deemed otherwise, and that people will choose for themselves whether using databases is right for them by their own standards.

I will not use databases - that is my personal position on it. But I cannot dictate to others how they should play their game - nor will I try and shove my views on it down their throats... it doesn't work that way. We must all understand and respect that some people will use databases and some will not. We all have our biases, but that is what makes us unique in our values and opinions.

Oh, and long live The Circle of Trust OTB

JG27Pyth wrote:

Correspondence Chess is it's own chess league with World Champions and Grandmaster's and a separate set of ELOs... if you think CC ruins your chess I guess you could mop up patzers paper tigers like Paul Keres and Alexander Alekhine both of whom allowed their skills to be deteriorated by CC.  There have been many crossover GMs holding titles in both OTB and CC. CC GMs are generally very very knowledgeable players and are highly sought as chess trainers.

well i have a problem with this statement, for the following reasons:

when Paul Keres and Alekhine used to play fantastic Correspondence Chess, did they have access to huge online databases?

Did they struggle to think up their own good moves , give up and boot up the latest version of Fritz or Shredder?

When entering a complex rook and pawn ending did they delve deep into their 12 terraflop endgame tablebases and beat you with 'perfect' moves?

hmmmm, i tend to think not, i presume the reason Keres and Alekhine were such good correspondence players, was because they were merely replicating their superb OTB in another medium (ie postal chess) which enabled the 2 players to play with many people all over the world that they would otherwise have found it impossible (before the advent of long haul flights and the internet) to play. 

How anyone can possibly compare this situation of two great masters playing postal chess, to people on an internet chess site using modern technology to defeat their opponents is beyond me!

lets not forget here guys that most of the correspondence rules were here long before a lot of the technology now available, and although its impossible to stop people using it (pity), it is to a certain extent ruining the beautiful game.....and the reason i think this is because i can assure you , that the enjoyment and satisfaction of winning a single hard fought game of chess, with beautiful ideas and moves that came from your own mind, easily outways any feelings you get from winning endless games with assistance, whether it be legal or not!

rant over :-)

Sooooooooooo....

When fischer led his way to become grandmaster he was cheating when games were adjourned? When he had his second go over positions with him all day and night? 

I'm just going to make a generalization here but I am guessing that anyone that does not support the use of books and databases are just about winning and losing games. What I mean is you guys that don't take the tools that are givin to you are saying that you want to play a game of chess and either win or lose without any intention actually turning yourself into a better chess player.

These tools DO help, I was a complete patzer OTB before I started playing here. And the first thing I did when I got here was started using the resources given. Now my friends won't even play me OTB, not that I am great but I have improved greatly.

Don't be so stubborn guys, you are only hurting yourself if you are looking for those beautiful positions that make you interested in the game. If you continue down the same path with a little opening repertoire you learned from paps you will sooner than later lose interest in the game. It's so much better to understand the lines you are playing and to study, and the best way to study is by playing CC. Play the game and learn.

I wish you guys would stay in line more than you do, I want to understand the game more and it's hard playing someone that just moves peices around waiting for the blunders.

I play with my book when trying new things, I try new things because my book inspires me. Other than that, I practice what I have learned from my books. If you think you have the underhand when playing someone that is using a book or database, that means you need to rethink playing the opening you are because obiously you don't know it inside out if a book is beating you. Don't be scared, knowledge is power, just like they say in school. If you don't want to forever learn then don't play the game.

BTW GRUMPTY, SORRY TO BUST YOUR RANT BUT IT IS AGAINST THE RULES TO USE ENDGAME TABLEBASES (DATABASES)  AND CHESS ENGINES. THE ARGUMENT IS IRRELEVANT.

Well guys n gals, when i play chess, i play you as though you are sat facing me, there is no book at my side, no databases, no nothing.

Iam not interested whether my ratings are 1100 or 2100. Is it a sport or is it a hobby? I play because i ENJOY the game

Well said, Gareth.

It seems to divide this way.

Most of the comments against books, databases etc., come from COT members, which is what you would expect.

Frankly I would opine that if it is within the rules, it is legal. 

Fair enough if you want to agree something else with someone before you play them, but as far as I'm concerned if it's within the rules, it's fair.

If both players in a CC game maxed out the rules and used databases yeah its fair.

If one does not, then even though it is allowed, the difference is unfair obviously but allowed. And I can see and understand why. And sin sin mo chara Evil H

But anyway I will stick to losing chess.. database free

It seems the other forum tally of non users and users is coming up half and half so far. Obviously it won't be an accurate ratio but its interesting to see!

kristinamaria wrote:

Well I, for one, never use grand master games, computer programs, databases or anything when I play. My live chess rating is terrible mainly because I become disconnected often. I'm also not very good at blitz chess. I need time to analyze the board.

It makes me sick to think I could be playing against people who cheat, actually. What, may I ask, is the point in cheating at an online game? You're not going to get any better. You're not using your brain. So why do it? To increase your rating so you can appear to be a "superior chess player" to people you've never met? To people you probably never will meet? To people who, if you DO meet, you'll probably play a real game with, and guess what? You're going to be pretty bad.

If you want to cheat, go ahead. But really, and I know this sounds cliche, but you're only cheating yourself.

I mean, honestly.

Whoa, whoa, whoa , whoa & Whoa.

Nobody is advocating cheating here, just using resources within the rules of the game.

Big difference!

You're missing the point.  No it's not to manipulate our ratings or our win/loss ratio or whatever.  I use databases to learn the game better.  It (like playing chess online with someone whom I will never see face to face) is a learning tool.  You cannot possibly say that my game is weaker because I have been using databases.  My game has improved tremendously since I started doing my homework first.  And I don't mean that I have more wins online with a database than I did without, I mean that I can sit down face to face in an OTB game and do a LOT better now because I have been playing CC.

Gotcha. Using these databases, you're right, is definitely within the rules of the game. I think I'm just bitter because I haven't been doing my homework, that's all. And that is definitely nobody's fault but my own.

I have a passionate hatred for people who cheat at this game, and I think I got carried away. Apologies to all; I didn't mean to offend anyone!

PS - I'm new to this chess lingo thing. What is OTB vs CC?

OTB = over the board i.e. face to face play. CC = correspondence chess, about equivalent to the turn based chess offered on chess.com

kristinamaria asked about CC & OTB:

 ericmittens posted this informative reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correspondence_chess in the counting DB users thread (http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/a-tally-of-database-users--non-users)

artfizz wrote:

kristinamaria asked about CC & OTB:

 ericmittens posted this informative reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correspondence_chess in the counting DB users thread (http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/a-tally-of-database-users--non-users)

NEVER give people credit for their own work!

Databases and books can only take you so far. I am currently playing a game where I am surprised to be still in book at the 12th move. Usually my opponent has dragged me out of the book into unknown territory lang before that.