Using Books & Databases for Playing Turn Based.

Exactly, and if you don't understand the moves you're making, you're just blinding doing what the databases say, they will drag you out of book right into their lair.

This idea that the databases somehow do the work for you and magically win games without one having to think is rather comical. If one normally plays bad losing moves in the opening, using databases merely allows you to postpone your bad, losing moves to the middle game. (Of course if your opponent insists on playing certain bad moves in the opening your database may just do the work for you...)

Grumpty seems to think that using chess engines is part of CC. This is ignorant. They aren't. Someone else mentioned that tablebases aren't allowed in CC, actually, in ICCF sanctioned CC tablebase are allowed. (BUT NOT HERE~! This is why people who've bothered to read and understand the rules of the game they purport to play refer to chess.com's turn based chess as modified CC)

Grumpty also mentioned keres and alekhine didn't have technological help -- well, they availed themselves of all the resources available, meaning all the published theory they could find. They played CC... and this all misses the point I'd been making, which is that it's absurd to think CC, as played today, harms a person's game turning them into a "paper tiger" --... there are today CC GMs who are also OTB GMs. Ulf Andersson, (highest rating 2625... he's beaten Karpov that's counts for something, eh?) is an active CC GM. There are many, sorry don't know them all.  Consulting databases during a game does not harm anyone's skills any more than consulting databases does while training (which all OTB GMs do, rather a lot).  Claiming CC use of databases harms your chess mostly reveals a lack of experience with databases -- IOWs talking about things you don't actually know about. 

Chess means thinking... anyone who wants to avoid thinking is advised to avoid chess. Whenever I get lazy at the chessboard and make fast moves or don't calculate I remind myself that chess is for thinking and if I don't want to think I should find something else to do. Databases are a tool for thinking about chess. Sure, some dopes might try to use databases to avoid thinking, but they aren't going to get anywhere and no one needs to bother about them -- No one who plays chess seriously tries to avoid thinking if they can help it... not with databases, or chess engines or any other way... real chess players DO use those tools to think deeper. These tools, databases in particular let you get deeper into the game.

I honestly believe that the majority of people who puff themselves up saying "I don't use databases blah blah, it's not what chess is about blah blah" really, deep down, are saying, "I'm not up to this new challenge, I'm not up to having to learn how to use databases and deepen my thinking with them... chess is hard enough as it is" They aren't trying to improve or challenge themselves... they are being mentally lazy at worst, or, more generously, fearful of the new.

psihrishi wrote: I dont follow the ideas of using books and databases in games.. Ofcoz U can analyse.. But why with a machine... The analysis Board is the best place .. and a very useful thing granted by the site... Using Databases and books definately helps us learn.. But I cant understand.. How do people get satisfaction by using those.. If they win!!!!

I occasionally use the Openings Database (via Game Explorer) and slightly more often use a Book Opening (via Start New Game). Both of these provide a greater variety of openings than I would ever think of using. Among the openings I have used I are:

• A00: Creepy Crawly Formation: Classical Defense

• B06: Pterodactyl Defense: Central, Quetzalcoatus Gambit
  
• B36: Siciliian Defense: Accelerated Dragon, Maroczy Bind Gurgenidze Variation
  
• C40: Elephant Gambit: Wasp Variation
  
• A43: Benoni Defense: Woozle
  
• A02: System: Double Duck Formation
  

My opponents and I take it in turns to choose an opening (sometimes on the basis of it having a silly name!), then we play two games - once as white and once as black.

Some chess players play 1.e4 all their lives. The rich facilites on this site rescue us from potential stagnation.

I could'nt agree with with you more Lob,

I want to learn to play the game well, having not played for a considerable period of time and having forgotten the openings. I have been trying to catch up on some basic openings of late more to avoid traps than anything else.

I do feel that to rely totally on an opening database defeats the object of thinking through the game and developing yourself strategically and tactically.

Once I work out the object of that particular opening, I rely on my OTB skills. After the game, I will consult an opening book - otherwise its a battle between researchers!   I have not got anything against the database users: horses for courses.  We all have to decide what it is in the game that gives us the most satisfaction.

artfizz wrote:

My opponents and I take it in turns to choose an opening (sometimes on the basis of it having a silly name!), then we play two games - once as white and once as black.

Some chess players play 1.e4 all their lives. The rich facilites on this site rescue us from potential stagnation.

 What a GREAT idea!!!  I need to look up that Double Duck opening.   

 THIS.

     I have to say, play with no reference other than what I can remember from practice and my readings. While it makes my rating here plunge, I know that I would get a rude awakening when I go back to playing face to face games. I know the rule adjustments, and that's fine. It's just not for me. I have no problem playing someone refering to external sources (with the exception of an outright chess engine).

I still only play with my poor little head. And I enjoy it that way  Makes me feel all OTB-y and happy 

Different strokes for different people. Why? Because of the different objectives in playing the game, such as: just to do away with time, for fun, for study, for experiments, for tournament preparation, for bragging rights ... and even for just messing around. And which one is the right objective? We know the right answer to that question. :)

Improving my openings was one of the main reasons I started to play CC here. 

For example, I lost an OTB game to essentually lower rated opponent in some sharp variation of Scandinavian ( as White ) recently, was very upset. So, I started CC game using the same variation ( it's great that you can start with any opening/variation ) and of course I use online databases. So, the book already ended, I got a good, playable position and learned what moves I should do next time I play OTB that freaking variation.Of course, now I am using only my head. I think, it's a shame that some people playing here can get bad position, lose a pawn already after 5-6 moves in the well known openings. They can as well play live chess, not having 3 days per move, save their time. If you don't know that far, just learn it here, use game explorer, it's only a few mouse clicks. It won't win the game for you, but you will be less patzer and more good player. If you want to use only your head, play OTB games or blitz/standard online.

To each his(hers) own.

For me any game of chess with another player has to be played fair and not by means of referring to the books or software or online media 'during' the game. It is definitely fine to do that 'before' and most certainly 'after' the game.

Some definitions of the word FAIR (and FAIRLY):

• fair: free from favoritism or self-interest or bias or deception; conforming with established standards or rules; "a fair referee"; "fair deal"; 
• fair: honest: gained or earned without cheating or stealing; "an honest wage"; "a fair penny" 
• fairly: in conformity with the rules or laws and without fraud or cheating; "they played fairly" 
• fairly: without favoring one party, in a fair evenhanded manner; "deal fairly with one another"
  

Chess.com's rules for playing:

During turn-based chess play on this site (though NOT during LiveChess play), 

"... You MAY use books, magazines, or other articles. You may also use computer databases (including Chess.com's Game Explorer) ..."

i agree that it detracts from the game for the person playing, but it adds to your learning and experience if you play someone who is constantly researching - it's like playing a grandmaster in some cases. :D

the point is it doesnt even help your development. i used to play chess against the computer with the d4 by avruk book (great book) but i can nearly remember nothing from it. if you want to learn its better to learn them seperatly, also i believe books are way better then databases. well i havent studied any books yet (just read the text) but i have the feeling that by setting up the pieces on the board, you can save, remember and progress the information way better. 

i didnt do it because i didnt have the patience, when im going to start to learn again, i will do just that. i think you will get faster with setting them up anyway.