Helping match teammates?

In a group match versus another group, is it considered ethical to help your teammates before they make any moves?

I am interested in making suggustions to teammates about what openings to play against particular opponents, by analyzing their opponents' past games.

If this is before the game then yes but in the middle then know.

good question. that was what I hoped the answers would be. Not during the game.

I see nothing wrong with being fully prepared before you start any game. Should do it myself sometime.

My understanding is that these Team Match games operate under the same rules as normal turn-based games on Chess.com:

What are the rules for playing?
You many only have ONE Chess.com member account. You may NOT get any help from any person or any chess engine that analyzes your specific position, including tablebases. You MAY use books, magazines, or other articles. You may also use computer databases.

I believe that a Team Mate falls under the category, "any person."

The idea of preparing for certain individuals before the match starts fails to take into account the other players who have yet to join and will alter who plays who.  The only way for this to be effective would be to research every player within a few spaces from you on either side, cuz it could change right up until that final bell.  But still a good idea.

yah by posting a comment :)

I agree with Lizard.  If you were to help out a teammate in a match between groups during a game it would become but an onslaught of vote chess games.  Before and after, of course it's fine to help out your teammates - in fact, I think they'd appreciate it.

The fun of individuals playing individuals will be lost.. Yes advise and best wishes before and after game are ok.. Must encourage participation by good words to all.. Just because this is online chess, it is still not easy to track if somebody is cheating or not.. in the long term it will not help the cheaters in anyway as they will not know the purpose of certain moves suggested or played by better players ..

Well put.

Well, if you prepare for your listed opponent, then your opponent changes, your preparation should help your teammate who plays your original opponent.

I had thoughts of doing this for teammates for our current matches, but have not had time.

I was able to prepare one game well for EnglishChessPlay in our match against The Dream Team. I looked through his played games. I found one where it looked to me like he had made a mistake, but his opponent blundered, and he went on to win. People tend to not look too closely at their wins, perhaps thinking "I naturally won because I outplayed my opponent" without pausing to think whether they erred first. I put in about 15 hours of analysis. To my disappointment, he blundered before reaching my analysis. http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=9911241

I don't remember - is it ok to suggest to a teammate that they go for a draw, for the team's sake?

I think it should be OK to suggest to a teammate that they go for a draw. That was one role of our team captain when I played for U.C. Berkeley in Toronto in the late 60's. That was considered ethical then, and I do not see why it should change.

rich, What is the ethical difference between a teammate helping me prepare for a tournament, versus a trainer helping me learn chess?

I see no difference.

I also see no conflict with chess.com's rules.

Before the game, you may do all the preperation, talking, planning, strategizing, theorizing, etc. that you want, with anyone you want. Once the game starts, NO outside help from teammates, coaches, other players, or any other person is allowed.

I agree, Baseballfan.

Good thing lol ... I do SO much pregame analysis when I'm playing much stronger opponents ... I know each and every one of their openings as thoroughly (and yes, engine assisted) as possible before the game starts ... once it starts though, all that ends... time to play :).

I believe that you mat be able to prepare before the match,but what  happens when they make a different move from the one that you were expecting.

Then you learned something that you could apply in another game.

*bump* - sorry just caught this thread in tracked activity and it perked my interest. I think banning pre game help smacks of obeying the letter of the rules whilst regarding their intent. On the other hand, when does preparation become interference?

The way I look at it is that you may not get interactive help (people, cpu's) to help decide on your moves for you. If your team strategy ("We are 7 pts clear guys, draw now if you can, we'll seal it") influences your play, then so what? That's good chess, but analysing a position in progress, and speaking to one of the players involved(!) about it may well influence their choice of move; even if you don't mean to, something you say could, by fluke, allow them to find a game-winning move - and who will believe you after the fact that you only intended to encourage, and not codedly tell them their next move?

An interesting grey area - post-mortems of game 1 during the 2nd game of a both-ends match. A strong and eloquent player could easily hide strategical advice in a breakdown of the first game, that *directly* pertains to the second game, by undertsanding the mutual weaknesses in both of the opponents positions. I'm a sly s*d, & I think I would be capable of this, if I turned my hand to it (of course, the players in question would have to be something I was able to handle.)

Ultimately I think the onus is on the teacher not to potentially involve themselves with a game in progress. Surely watching a teammate win on their own is more satisfying in the end anyway? By all means help your fellows, but before and after the fact... If you happen to have looked at a position *at all* then avoid conversing about it until it terminates, full stop. You probably can't go wrong there. I think this idea handles the draw rule that David & Ozzie bring up. I just think if you have looked at the game in question, make no suggestions at all, because it may be construed as interference, even if your suggestion was not influenced by the current state of the game.

Think of it like spying on your kids. By peeking, you have to agree to remove yourself from any involvement, else you look bad and they learn the wrong lesson - you just gotta hope they make you proud. I think looking at a game in progress that's not yours means you must agree to keep your thoughts to yourself until its over...

Someone will point out the flaw in the kids analogy above - what if you know your "kid" is in danger, and you have to intervene? You go to the authorities, of course. The only case that applies to chess is that you believe you have found a cheat, in which case report them to chess.com, not the player on your team who faces.

So, no, I don't see an issue with suggesting someone should go for a draw mid-game... as long as the suggestion does not come from someone who has studied the position in question. Otherwise, "go for a draw" could be interpreted as "you have a bad position, but there is a drawing line". Again though, its largely difficult stop people breaching this code of conduct. Even if you mean to give non-specific advice, your subconscious bias might not be so tight-lipped. I'm gonna guess that the NM's who posted here are no stranger to the non-conscious part of their brain playing some spectatctular moves for them, and I don't see how you can expect to stop that uncontrollable, incpomprehnsible part of your brain "accidentally" doing something great it found, whether it's your board or not.

Phew! I hope nobody actually went to the trouble of reading all that, and just skipped to this bit, like I would have!

that is the wrong no.