Originally posted by TommyCTo me, computer-aided chess is a completely different game requiring (in many ways) quite different skills. (For example, having a faster computer, having more and better engines, or sheer patience could all be decisive over the course of a game. Pure tactical analysis - for many people the hardest and most rewarding part of "human" chess - can be left to the computer.)
Judge for yourself ...
http://www.amici.iccf.com/issues/Issue_07/issue_07_ivar_bern_part_1.html
5 errors in total in the tournament, only one that put him close to losing . . . The fact is the top Advanced CC players all have access to the same computers (unless Hydra is competing) therefore, it is the human element that will decide, however minimal a d nc Hamarat?!) hasn't lost a game with white in 40 years: around 2/3rds of his life, that is...
Correspondence chess should be engine-free, with the same sort of moderation as at RHP. It may be very difficult to police, but that doesn't mean you should not try.
Engine-aided correspondence chess should be a different entity altogether.
Originally posted by dottewellYes I don't play advanced chess either, nor do I wish to. But if people want to, I wouldn't want to stop them - provided it's somewhere where that's allowed.
To me, computer-aided chess is a completely different game requiring (in many ways) quite different skills. (For example, having a faster computer, having more and better engines, or sheer patience could all be decisive over the course of a game. Pure tactical analysis - for many people the hardest and most rewarding part of "human" chess - can be left to ...[text shortened]... should not try.
Engine-aided correspondence chess should be a different entity altogether.
Originally posted by TommyCAbsolutely. For instance I just analysed Game 2286782. Now make no mistake, I messed up a won endgame with careless play; and we both missed some quite obvious, and possibly decisive, tactical manouevres. Things that engines spot in seconds (or less).
Yes I don't play advanced chess either, nor do I wish to. But if people want to, I wouldn't want to stop them - provided it's somewhere where that's allowed.
But it occurred to me later that that's exactly why I enjoy playing here. Because I can say to myself - if I stopped playing at work, if I was more careful and systematic, I'd be a better player. If chess was played with engine help, then for someone with my relatively limited positional understanding of chess, that motivation would completely disappear.
Originally posted by TommyCWell good for him - "Tunc Hamarat!" Now, when is he going to play OTB and make that kind of impact in the real chess world? hehe Just kid'n.
Judge for yourself ...
http://www.amici.iccf.com/issues/Issue_07/issue_07_ivar_bern_part_1.html
5 errors in total in the tournament, only one that put him close to losing . . . The fact is the top Advanced CC players all have access to the same computers (unless Hydra is competing) therefore, it is the human element that will decide, however minimal a d nc Hamarat?!) hasn't lost a game with white in 40 years: around 2/3rds of his life, that is...
"Perhaps they should scrap the CC GM title and call it a CC Messenger title, showing who is the best messenger of the engines available."
With all due respect, I don't think you have a very clear idea of what goes behind correspondence chess. If your hypothesis is true then the best correspondence players would be the ones with the strongest chess engines, right? Arno says he uses an old copy of Fritz 8 on a slow PC and only lets it run for a few minutes tops. Yet that dusty old version of Fritz, plus his strategic insight, was enough to defeat Hydra (twice!!)
If you just play whatever move the computers like, you will LOSE every correspondence game you ever play, unless you're lucky enough to be playing against somebody with an equally ignorant strategy.
There are a significant number of decisive results in high level correspondence chess. You may find many games where there have been decisive results on ICCF, which allows engine use.
http://www.iccf-webchess.com/EventCrossTable.aspx?id=73
Obviously no engine use in the game below, but it is a moderately interesting CC game...CC games sometimes are more fun to study.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1077560
Of course CC players at this site have beaten strong banned engine users (and have drawn many, many times). You may have seen most of these before. I've already posted some of these...I didn't include the Akizy-Ironman one because I've tired of playing through it.
Game 997086
Game 810662 (White has a winning position here)
Game 1598004
Game 1293010
Game 1682902 White sees nine full moves ahead to the current position and wins.
Game 1723252 A strong player of the English...
Here is the link to WCCC (World Chess Computer Championship) 2006
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?tid=52440
Once I pitted Fritz8 against 2 of the weaker engines that comes with Fritz8. I never got around to having it finish. There were more decisive results than I would have thought.
Engine Tournament 4' + 2" (w/o opening books, databases, and "permanent brain" )
Standings (W-D-L) Points
Fritz8......... 9-1-2........ 9.5/12
Crafty 19.01:..... 5-4-3..... 7/12
Comet B50:...... 3-5-12..... 5.5/20