"Analyze" button?

I would be surprised if this has not already been a topic of debate, but i just found the analyze button that can be used during games. Wouldn't this allow any player to play like a computer?

At the beginning of some games, I have had a few people say I was playing like a computer. I quickly dispel that notion with some inaccuracies, mistakes and blunders; however, i now know why they have said that.

My main question is why is this an option? It seems like it is wide open to "cheating". (I also have some reserve about the analyze button, but that is for another day).

My next question revolves around the infinte number of positions that can be attained on the chess board. How many posistions are in the database now, and how fast is it growing each day?

I know the tools are meant to help. But shouldn't a game be the most honest measure of a person's ability? Knowing that some people may be using this against me is disheartening. I love chess.com, but ???

If you're referring to turn-base games, then human analysis between moves using an analysis board here or a physical board at home is perfectly OK ... even expected. However, human analysis cannot make use of any hardware or software playing or analyzing engines ... though you may make use of game databases (in computers or not) and any literature you have or can get access to. Doing so is not considered cheating by turn-based rules.

I apologize. I was referring to the "explore" function.

This tells you the computed best moves in order of past success. I could see novice players using this to play just like a computer. They might boost their ranking to 2000+; however, in real life, they would have problem playing another novice.

I do not think this should be available during a game.

The analyze board is not much better. You cannot move the pieces around in real life. I am sure your opponent would object to you moving a few pieces around three or four times.

The "explore" function has nothing to do with computed moves.  It's a summary of moves of previously played games.  That's totally different than using a computer engine to analyze a position and calculate the best move.

As for "moving pieces around in real life", that's one of the differences between correspondence games and live games.  In a live game, whether over the board or via Internet connection, use of a secondary board to work out lines is forbidden.  In correspondence games, whether the traditional move-by-mail form or the online form, use of secondary boards has always been allowed, as well as use of research materials.  Computer engines are still forbidden.

If you're not comfortable with the use of secondary boards and research materials during a game, then correspondence chess obviously isn't for you.

An honest game?  Look through the forums and you'll find a fair amount of support from others who consider correspondence rules to be cheating even when those rules are clearly specified, understood, and followed by both players.  Another word the anti-corresponders like to apply to themselves is "purists"--  in general they are quite impressed with their own high standards, and contemptuous of the chess ability, standards, and honesty/morality of those who dare to enjoy the contemplative nature of correspondence chess.

Is it "too much to ask for"?  If you're referring to correspondence chess, then yes, it would be too much for you to ask that rules that have been in place for more than a century be set aside because you're on some holier-than-thou kick and think that devotees of correspondence chess are dishonest.  If you don't like it, don't play it.  Simple as that.  The live chess games conform to standard OTB rules, so both options are available to their fans.  A lot of people enjoy both the live and correspondence forms, each for what it offers.

Quote: Look through the forums and you'll find a fair amount of support from others who consider correspondence rules to be cheating even when those rules are clearly specified, understood, and followed by both players.

Well, it sounds like I am not alone.

Quote:  rules that have been in place for more than a century be set aside 

Did people in the  early 1900s use Macs or PCs?

Quote: If you don't like it, don't play it.

How about chess.com give the option to play against others that do not rely on extensive databases for which to base their moves? That doesn't seem too hard. At the very least, it is not too much to ask for. They can always ignore the request.

I was hoping to hear from both sides, but I am guessing this has been hashed out too many times, and each side is just tired of the argument. I only say this because you said there have already been forums dedicated to this.

And I can only guess you really rely extensively on this information to play and are willing to justify your actions. No problem here with me. I just wish I knew what I was up against every time I played: a chess player or a computer.

By the way, have you actually clicked on the "analyze" button available for online games?  Have you figured out yet that it does not start some computer analysis, but merely pops up a secondary board that allows you to make test moves on your own without commiting them to the game?  Any "analysis" resulting from clicking that button is done by the player.

I am fed up with people like the OP who think it is perfectly ok to see the pieces. As a blindfold purist, I do not think aides such as looking at the board is fair at all, since chess is a game of the mind, not of the eye. Hopefully dishonest cheaters like you will eventually learn to recognize that you are violating the spirit of the game and you will stop playing with your eyes open.

Whirlwind: that is a very professional repsonse. I am now just torn about whether I want to cross over and click that little button just to make sure my opponent is not using it to get an advantage over me. I should not have to worry about that, but I guess I have no alternative. I am just really disappointed.

Well, you seem to be worried that using the Analysis board is akin to cheating. However, as long as you're not using a computer to help you, you're not cheating. I like turn-based chess the best, because I use the Analyze and Explore options, as well as Notes, in order to "deep-clean" my chess-playing, in order to try to get it as good as I possibly can. As long as everybody does these things, we're all playing on the same field. Look at it this way: there is a reason Chess.com gives us these tools. They are for our benefit! They help us train and improve.

Awesome.

This is absolute drivel.  You have been told repeatedly that the analyze button merely opens another board on which you can make practice moves.  It offers no evaluations of those moves.  Moreover, utilizing the board will tell you nothing about whether your opponent is using it.

If you want to be paranoid about something, why not just worry that your opponent is running all of his positions through Rybka on his home computer?  That would be against the rules, but you seem absolutely determined to find something to fret about.  You probably suspect some illicit activity by every player who has ever beaten you online.

I have already stated that in my initial post, I mistakingly referred to the "analyze" button when I meant the "explore" function. Settle down and focus. It seems like you would have wore out this point if it had not already been corrected.

And no, I did not suspect some illicit activity by every player I played online. I was just surprised to see how easily this information was being to supplied to me and other players. It also made sense that I was accused of playing like a computer in the beginning of games. I guess I was a little nieve on how cheating was possible.

And what about those Rybkas? I will have to look for one on eBay.

Wow, you really are a babe in the woods, aren't you?

You had some good points in the conversation, but your comments overshadow any potential validity. You seemed hell-bent on getting in a few put-downs and barbs in each post. Either that, or you were quick to suggest that I just not play.

Take out these testoterone laced comments/insults and I might have been able to have legitmate conversation with you.

It has been amusing, and I am sure others are just as anxious as you are to see some more of your quick wit.

This from the guy who tosses around the word "cheating" to refer to legal, traditional conditions for a game, and who says he's looking for an "honest" game.