06 Jan 05
2 edits
Originally posted by ExyNo, and that's NOT what I'm saying, that's NOT the point I'm making.
Do you think that all GMs have instinctively come to know the game as well as they do without tuition, without studying databases of past games, without immersing themselves totally in the history of the game?
I'm talking about using the books and databases DURING AN ACTUAL GAME.
Of course, I *know* that everybody studies books and databases, I'm not stupid. I study books myself.
But.
I'm not talking about "tuition" and "studying" before and after games--I'm talking about WHILE YOU'RE PLAYING A GAME.
During the course of a game.
While the game is in progress.
See?
I would really challenge anybody to show me where any GM was permitted to consult a book, or even another person, WHILE HE WAS PLAYING A GAME, even just a friendly game with his uncle.
Adding: I understand the point about Correspondence chess going on for months, and being allowed to "read chess books" while the game is technically in progress--but "reading chess books" to my mind is different than "consulting chess books to look up what move would be good here". To me, either you know how to play, in your own brain, or you don't, and the game is the test, the Pop Quiz, of whether you know how to play or not.
06 Jan 05
3. YOUR REGISTRATION OBLIGATIONS
In consideration of your use of the Service, you represent that you are of legal age to form a binding contract and are not a person barred from receiving services under the laws of the United States or other applicable jurisdiction. You also agree to :
(a) You will not create more than one account.
(b) You will not use chess software, chess computers or consult any third party to assist you in any game (unless expressly agreed prior to any game). Chess books and databases can be consulted during play.
(c) You may not threaten or harass other users of this Service.
06 Jan 05
5 edits
Originally posted by ChessMomSorry, I did mean to suggest you missed the point. However, in actuality when can a book or database ever really tell you exactly what the best move in any given position will be unless you're still playing through a known book opening?
No, and that's NOT what I'm saying, that's NOT the point I'm making.
I'm talking about using the books and databases DURING AN ACTUAL GAME.
Of course, I *know* that everybody studies books and databases, I'm not stupid. I st ...[text shortened]... the test, the Pop Quiz, of whether you know how to play or not.
I've used Chessbase online sometimes and never found a single match for my current position - in reality looking at databases between moves (during a correspondance game) isn't a crib. I'd just like to spot weaknesses or repetive mistakes in my game to help improve it.
06 Jan 05
Originally posted by ChessMomDifferent rules apply to correspondence chess. GMs most certainly do use books and databases while playing by correspondence.
No, and that's NOT what I'm saying, that's NOT the point I'm making.
I'm talking about using the books and databases DURING AN ACTUAL GAME.
Of course, I *know* that everybody studies books and databases, I'm not stupid. I study books myself.
But.
I'm not talking about "tuition" and "studying" before and after games--I'm talkin ...[text shortened]... or you don't, and the game is the test, the Pop Quiz, of whether you know how to play or not.
But don't get too worked up about the idea. Using an opening book will help a player not at all unless they have the skills necessary to understand the moves they are making. There isn't a book for the middle-game, and databases won't help unless a solid game is being played anyway.
06 Jan 05
Originally posted by ChessMomI think you're missing the whole point.
No, and that's NOT what I'm saying, that's NOT the point I'm making.
I'm talking about using the books and databases DURING AN ACTUAL GAME.
Of course, I *know* that everybody studies books and databases, I'm not stupid. I study books myself.
But.
I'm not talking about "tuition" and "studying" before and after games--I'm talkin ...[text shortened]... or you don't, and the game is the test, the Pop Quiz, of whether you know how to play or not.
There are more different games of chess than there are grains of sand on every single beach in the world. A lot.
Databases are only good for referring to the opening game, when most games follow opening books anyway.
Books can never tell u "what move would be good here", without u having the ability to recognise that applying whatever principal the book is referring to applies to the game in hand. The book will never have a diagram of a game (outside of the opening game) which matches 100% with your own game. So the book can never say, when u reach this position the best move is x.
That's the difference between engines and databases/books. With databases/books, u still need to apply your own chess knowledge to the position in hand.
D
06 Jan 05
2 edits
Originally posted by ExyWell.
(b) You will not use chess software, chess computers or consult any third party to assist you in any game (unless expressly agreed prior to any game). Chess books and databases can be consulted during play.
Color me surprised, then.
And a little bit disappointed. 🙁 I hadn't realized that apparently, everyone playing games on RHP is using books and databases to tell them what the good moves would be. So, all those games I've been studying here, that people are linking to, are the results of two people playing chess, not on their own "tick", but with guidebooks in hand?
I see. 🙁
So, then, to me, the ratings are even more meaningless, being only a measure of "how well a person can play chess with suggestions ready to hand", rather than "How well a person can play chess", period.
To me, the quibble about "how complex a game chess is, so therefore a book or database can't help you win" is meaningless. I guess I'm a purist, and to me, if you get any kind of help, to me, that invalidates your whole game, whether you win or not. I don't want to play chess with "you plus Capablanca", or "you plus the Fritz database", or "you plus your Uncle John who is sitting at the kitchen table giving you advice"--I want to play chess with *you* alone. Mano a mano.
Well. Different strokes, I guess.
06 Jan 05
1 edit
Originally posted by ChessMomI guess Correspondence Chess isn't for you then, cos they're the rules on every CC website.
Well.
Color me surprised, then.
And a little bit disappointed. 🙁 I hadn't realized that apparently, everyone playing games on RHP is using books and databases to tell them what the good moves would be. So, all those games I've b ...[text shortened]... ou* alone. Mano a mano.
Well. Different strokes, I guess.
Have fun with your life.
D
06 Jan 05
Originally posted by ChessMomWell, I guess this site's not for you then - I did wonder why you've not actually made a move since you signed up back in March last year - well now I know. 😏
I guess I'm a purist, and to me, if you get any kind of help, to me, that invalidates your whole game, whether you win or not. I don't want to play chess with "you plus Capablanca", or "you plus the Fritz database", or "you plus your Uncle John who is sitting at the kitchen table giving you advice"--I want to play chess with *you* alone. Mano a mano.
06 Jan 05
Originally posted by ChessMomI don't think the majority makes much use of books/databases.Not on rhp.This site is a special animal,one of a kind,IMO.For instance,where else can you see players compete for the most moves?Only on rhp,as far as I know.
Well.
Color me surprised, then.
And a little bit disappointed. 🙁 I hadn't realized that apparently, everyone playing games on RHP is using books and databases to tell them what the good moves would be. So, all those games I've been studying here, that people are linking to, are the results of two people playing chess, not on their own "tick", b ...[text shortened]... --I want to play chess with *you* alone. Mano a mano.
Well. Different strokes, I guess.
I think the use of books can be linked to ratings(more or less),players around 1400 will use books,though maybe not too much.Players around 1500 use them a bit more,and so on.
Of course,this is just a rough estimate,and there will always be exceptions.
Chessmom,do not despair.Just put in your profile that you want to play without use of any tools,and also request this at the start of a game.Most players here will honour your request,I think.
06 Jan 05
Originally posted by ChessMomNot everyone on RHP uses books and databases. But it's a fact that all the higher rated players (1500+) do. I made this exact same point in the "is this cheating" thread, a person there admitted to playing the first 19 (at the very least, he didn't say how many after that) moves of his game purely thorugh looking it up in databases and online, to see how GMs played in that position.
I hadn't realized that apparently, everyone playing games on RHP is using books and databases to tell them what the good moves would be. So, then, to me, the ratings are even more meaningless, being only a measure of "how well a person can play chess with suggestions ready to hand", rather than "How well a person can play chess", period.
To me, the ...[text shortened]... complex a game chess is, so therefore a book or database can't help you win" is meaningless.
As I said in that thread, it's not cheating according to the rules, but it sure as [censored] ain't playing chess either. My rating's rather pathetic in comparison to many on the site, but it was gained through playing chess rather than playing "who's got the biggest database".
06 Jan 05
1 edit
I think people who are damning database use are talking about it in a vaccuum. I challenge anybody to take on a non-rated game against me and play white opening with E4. From then on in you can check each position after online at Chessbase (www.chesslive.de) and see how many moves in we get before you find it's of no use to you. I reckon at most it will be about 9 or 10 moves in.
06 Jan 05
Chessmom,do not despair.Just put in your profile that you want to play without use of any tools,and also request this at the start of a game.Most players here will honour your request,I think.
Yes, that's right. If anybody wants to play "pure", they should just tell "no books or databases please" at the beginning of the game, although it will end up in "who's got the better memory" anyway. After all, people who play chess very well usually have lots of openings memorised. Or is consulting your memory also considered a cheating? 😉
06 Jan 05
2 edits
Originally posted by ExyYour example is more than a little flawed - in your analogy, a textbook/class notes would be equivalent to a database, and an engine would be equivalent to a calculator. And I recall when I took my tests, we were not allowed to take your textbooks or notes. The reson calculators are used is because it's not humanly possible to calculate sin, cos, tan, logorithms, etc in your head.
For a long while now students have been allowed to take calculators into their maths exams - do you anti-databasers disapprove of this too?! 😉
An opening database book simply sets the maths problem, you've still got you use your brain to solve it.