Originally posted by ambienceHe asked the wrong question.
So much pretentiousness and snobbery!
Why is everyone having a go at the opener of this thread? The question was asked in a civil manner and, hey presto, some geezer with strong emotions straight away blasted him. The continued strong emotions against him, and those that wish to hear his viewpoint, suggests that the pro-database users are ignorant!
Be ...[text shortened]... espondence chess is not for the impatient.
Come on all, calm down and enjoy yourselves 🙄
As the now infamous creater of this thread... I was very surprised by how much debate it caused. It's ironic because I didn't really think much about the database issue. But this has been by far the most contentious question:
Is this cheating? Using a book or computer source to play an opening (i.e., playing the first couple moves based on a book or computer's program)
Answers Votes Percent
1. Yes, this is cheating. 9 36%
2. No, this is fair. 13 52%
3. "Not sure" or "No Opinion" 3 12%
I thought it was also interesting the results between these two questions (which I think are pretty much the same issue):
Is this cheating -- Using a computer to analyze positions and then determine what move to make (i.e., running the position through Fritz, Chessmaster, etc).
Answers Votes Percent
1. Yes, this is cheating. 23 92%
2. No, this is fair. 2 8%
3. "Not sure" or "No Opinion" 0 0%
Is this cheating -- Using a computer to only analyze a position and tell you who is winning (i.e., not having the computer tell you what move to make but determine who is winning and/or by how much) (This option is fundamentally different from question 1🙄
Answers Votes Percent
1. Yes, this is cheating. 20 80%
2. No, this is fair. 5 20%
3. "Not sure" or "No Opinion" 0 0%
Finally, I was surprised with this result:
Is this cheating -- Strategically forgoing a move and waiting until time runs nearly out in the off chance your opponent grows frustrated and abandons the game.
Answers Votes Percent
1. Yes, this is cheating. 4 16%
2. No, this is fair. 19 76%
3. "Not sure" or "No Opinion" 2 8%
I find this behavior some of the most offensive in the world of online chess and definitely think it is unfair. Just my humble opinion.... which apparently only 16% of people agree with!!! 🙂
Originally posted by BlueEyedRookIronically, your database is too small to be useful.
As the now infamous creater of this thread... I was very surprised by how much debate it caused. It's ironic because I didn't really think much about the database issue. But this has been by far the most contentious question:
Is this cheating? Using a book or computer source to play an opening (i.e., playing the first couple moves based on a boo ...[text shortened]... t my humble opinion.... which apparently only 16% of people agree with!!! 🙂
Originally posted by BlueEyedRookIf they are moving within the time allowed then they are following the moves and it therefore it can't possibly cheating. So the only possible answer is 2. However, your choices are badly worded as not being 1 does not imply 2.
Is this cheating -- Strategically forgoing a move and waiting until time runs nearly out in the off chance your opponent grows frustrated and abandons the game.
Answers Votes Percent
1. Yes, this is cheating. 4 16%
2. No, this is fair. 19 76%
3. "Not sure" or "No Opinion" 2 8%
I find this behavior some of the most offensiv ...[text shortened]... is unfair. Just my humble opinion.... which apparently only 16% of people agree with!!! 🙂
Originally posted by BlueEyedRookThe difficulty with these questions is that you haven't given enough information. Provided that those conditions have been agreed to in advance then it's not cheating, if they haven't it is. So on this site it is fair to use books and databases, as they are allowed by the site and therefore prearranged, but using enigne help is cheating; although on other sites it may not be.
Is this cheating? Using a book or computer source to play an opening (i.e., playing the first couple moves based on a book or computer's program)
Is this cheating -- Using a computer to analyze positions and then determine what move to make (i.e., running the position through Fritz, Chessmaster, etc).
Is this cheating -- Using a computer to on ...[text shortened]... il time runs nearly out in the off chance your opponent grows frustrated and abandons the game.
The last question is about gamesmanship rather than actual cheating; I think most people would agree that it's not really cricket, but it's not actual cheating either.
You see you've mixed up two things in each question - should it be allowed, and is it. Some people will have been answering the first question and some the second. This messes up your results as you've essentially asked misleading questions.
We all know that using databases is allowed at this [and presumably at most] chess correspondence sites. I understood the question asked in a round about way was , "would you consider it fair to use them against others that do not". The answer is obviously NO it's not exactly FAIR but it's allowed. Mainly because disallowing it couldn't be enforced. It would be nice if everyone who uses them was as honest about doing so as those in this thread.
Or does almost everyone at this site use databases?
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveIf it's specifically allowed by the rules how can it not be fair?
We all know that using databases is allowed at this [and presumably at most] chess correspondence sites. I understood the question asked in a round about way was , "would you consider it fair to use them against others that do not". The answer is obviously NO it's not exactly FAIR but it's allowed. Mainly because disallowing it couldn't be enforced. ...[text shortened]... bout doing so as those in this thread.
Or does almost everyone at this site use databases?
As in; not a fair fight.
eg, in a boxing match, if one of the boxers was wearing a headguard he would have an unfair advantage over his opponent who wasn't wearing one.
Although it could be allowed and perfectly legal, he would still have an advantage over the other.
And if the headguard was invisible that definately would make it unfair [in my opinion] to the other boxer [player]
Fair enough if it's known in advance.