Question regarding Community Policies

Sort:
John6447

If you go to the community policies page (https://www.chess.com/community), you will see if you scroll down that under Fair Play Policies, it says

  • You may use Opening Explorer or other opening books without engine evaluations in Daily chess only

I was unsure of exactly what engine evaluation meant and wanted to make sure that I am not breaking any rules. I have a chess opening book, MCO 15th edition, and wanted to make sure it was allowed to be used in daily games. At the end of most lines/variations, there will be a plus over equals sign for slight advantage to white, plus over line for considerable advantage, and equals sign for equals. These aren’t like +1.092 centipawns evaluations, but do they count as engine evaluations?

Ultimately what I am asking is is Modern Chess Openings 15th edition legal for use in correspondence/daily games? Thanks for the help!

Martin_Stahl
John6447 wrote:

If you go to the community policies page (https://www.chess.com/community), you will see if you scroll down that under Fair Play Policies, it says

  • You may use Opening Explorer or other opening books without engine evaluations in Daily chess only

I was unsure of exactly what engine evaluation meant and wanted to make sure that I am not breaking any rules. I have a chess opening book, MCO 15th edition, and wanted to make sure it was allowed to be used in daily games. At the end of most lines/variations, there will be a plus over equals sign for slight advantage to white, plus over line for considerable advantage, and equals sign for equals. These aren’t like +1.092 centipawns evaluations, but do they count as engine evaluations?

Ultimately what I am asking is is Modern Chess Openings 15th edition legal for use in correspondence/daily games? Thanks for the help!

 

MCO is fine. You just can't directly get eval from an engine and should use resources that have numerical engine evaluations embedded. There are some opening explorer type sites that so, and those really shouldn't be used.