gms playing correspondence?

Originally posted by wormwood
none. they use engines for blunder checking, not for selecting moves.

ICCF World Champion Ivar Bern uses it for a lot more.

From http://amici.iccf.com/issues/Issue_07/issue_07_ivar_bern_part_1.html :

"My program isn’t even close to playing perfect chess. The same goes for the
other programs that some of my opponents use. There is a lot of work left for humans.
Therefore, I have no fear of the computer death. But it is important to leave some of
the work to the computer. Fritz never rests. At night he (Bern uses “he” and not “it”
about his god friend Fritz) mostly does «Deep Position analysis» or «Blunder Check».
Occasionally he works on the same position all night through (”Infinite Analysis&rdquo😉.
And I always check his suggestions. ”Blunder Check” is incredibly helpful in the
openings, where Fritz unveiled many poor analyses in Informator and ECO.
In some types of positions Fritz is relatively helpless, as in the King’s Indian
where he believes Black must play h5-h4 (and not g5-g4). On the other hand,
Fritz played surprisingly well in the Stonewall. The best CC player is he who
manages to supplement the computer programs most effectively. I am never satisfied
with the conclusion “unclear” but keep on going until the computer gives preference to my position."

Originally posted by wormwood
I guess that can be read both ways, but I read him saying he doesn't trust engines.

He doesn't "trust" them as in blindly following their advice. But he certainly uses them for more than blunder-checking. What he's saying is that man and machine working together are better than either one on their own.

Originally posted by z00t
Correspondence chess does not appeal to professional chess players because of

- it takes too long to finish a tournament
- there are no prizes like in top level chess
- ICCF allows engines or is silent on them meaning those players produce computerised results. I wonder how many ICCF titles Fritz has won with no credit to Franz Morsch?

On the likes of ...[text shortened]... one which bar engines appeal to club-level/strong amateurs who want to try out new openings etc.

Are you trying to convince me OTB has nice prizes if you're not rated 2600+?

Because you're wrong...