I should have sent this to rec.games.chess.computer too, so are doing so
now.

Perhaps if anyone would wants to reply to the comment, it would be
better if they reply under this, as it is cross-posted.

Dave (from the UK) wrote:
Is there any *hard* evidence that computer Chess databases improve one's
chess?

The Russians have done pretty well at chess, yet during the cold war,
the availability of computers in Russia was severely restricted.

Someone stated to me that:

"And it is much more difficult to improve without a database, especially
if you don't have a coach."

Again, is there any evidence of this?

I'm updating some information about the free chess database ChessDB

http://chessdb.sourceforge.net/

and would like some evidence that chess databases in general result in
an improvement of ones chess. Unlike ChessBase, who make stupid claims
like:

Everyone uses ChessBase, from the World Champion to the

amateur next door.

(see http://www.chessbase.com/shop/produc...11&user=&coin= if
you don't believe me the **** they talk)

I'd like to back some of this up. Has there been any serious study into
the effect databases have on one's chess? I can well imagine that could
be a subject of a PhD.




--
Dave (from the UK)

Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form:
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.

http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)

Dave (from the UK) wrote:

I'd like to back some of this up. Has there been any serious study into
the effect databases have on one's chess? I can well imagine that could
be a subject of a PhD.

You are never going to get a "control" group together, or create a
double blind study of non-users or users of bad data.

At the grandmaster level, they use it period. At lower levels you will
never be able to filter out for talent or training.

So, I think your PHD study will be non-existent.

There is a truth that at the match level at the highest levels, players
prepare against each other, and database work is a part of that
preparations. For trainers, use of database work to investigate things
like opening theory are useful. For writers of opening books for
computers.

Sometimes it is sort of basically obvious that some tools are basically
suited for a job at hand.

What I suspect you are asking, is just rummaging around a database
useful for plastic-pieces joe. Who knows, who cares. They enjoy it or
don't. But if you have a specific task you are doing, of course it
helps, why wouldn't it?

Dave (from the UK) wrote:

I should have sent this to rec.games.chess.computer too, so are doing so
now.

Perhaps if anyone would wants to reply to the comment, it would be
better if they reply under this, as it is cross-posted.

Dave (from the UK) wrote:
Is there any *hard* evidence that computer Chess databases improve one's
chess?


Some, no doubt. Is it meaningful? Probably not.

Reading books is good.

The Russians have done pretty well at chess, yet during the cold war,
the availability of computers in Russia was severely restricted.

Someone stated to me that:

"And it is much more difficult to improve without a database, especially
if you don't have a coach."

Again, is there any evidence of this?


Sure, but it's bound not to be conclusive. Databases haven't been
around long enough for that to happen. Neither, for that matter, have
computers....

I'm updating some information about the free chess database ChessDB

http://chessdb.sourceforge.net/

and would like some evidence that chess databases in general result in
an improvement of ones chess. Unlike ChessBase, who make stupid claims
like:

Everyone uses ChessBase, from the World Champion to the

amateur next door.


Ummm.... they're trying to sell the program. Whatcha gonna do... report
them to advertising standards?

(see http://www.chessbase.com/shop/produc...11&user=&coin= if
you don't believe me the **** they talk)


It's ridiculous to suggest "...everyone..." certainly, but it's not
"****" to suggest that many class players and probably most GMs use
their software. Whether the software is being used *effectively* is
another question entirely.

Whether it's being used *as effectively as possible* is still another
question.

I'd like to back some of this up. Has there been any serious study into
the effect databases have on one's chess? I can well imagine that could
be a subject of a PhD.


No chance.

Where would one find data? Who could supervise the Ph.D.? Who could
mark it?

Mark (from the UK)

--
Dave (from the UK)

Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form:
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.

http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)

Dave (from the UK) wrote:
Someone stated to me that:

"And it is much more difficult to improve without a database,
especially if you don't have a coach."

Again, is there any evidence of this?

Well, I don't know about ``much more difficult to improve'' but I, as
a pretty weak player (106BCF) find databases very useful as a means of
finding a collection of games in an opening I might be interested in.
This lets me see what the general plans are in the openings: whizz
through thirty or forty games at a couple of seconds a move and you
soon see whether you should be aiming for a kingside attack, queenside
space advantage or whatever.


Everyone uses ChessBase, from the World Champion to the
amateur next door.

(see http://www.chessbase.com/shop/produc...11&user=&coin= if
you don't believe me the **** they talk)

Well, the World Champion almost certainly uses ChessBase. There are
plenty of amateurs who use it (otherwise, the software wouldn't be
commercially viable). And while it's not true to say that literally
everybody uses it, that's fairly standard marketing speak for ``people
of a wide range of abilities use ChessBase''.


Dave.

--
David Richerby Solar-Powered Microsoft.com (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like an E-commerce portal that's
really hard to use but it doesn't work
in the dark!

"Dave (from the UK)"
wrote in message ...
I should have sent this to rec.games.chess.computer too, so are doing so
now.


Dave (from the UK) wrote:
Is there any *hard* evidence that computer Chess databases improve one's
chess?

Sorry for losing the original post.

The database question comes down to whether it's easier to study and prepare
from paper notes or from electronic compilations of games, openings, and
positions. I don't see how it could be easier to do it the old way. The
databases per se aren't doing anything magical, they're just maintaining
these records -- and a lot more -- in an easily, readily, and quickly
accessible format. Instead of hunting for something in a book and probably
not finding it, you now have it on a computer.

En/na Ange1o DePa1ma ha escrit:
"Dave (from the UK)"
wrote in message ...

I should have sent this to rec.games.chess.computer too, so are doing so
now.

Dave (from the UK) wrote:
Is there any *hard* evidence that computer Chess databases improve one's
chess?

Sorry for losing the original post.

The database question comes down to whether it's easier to study and prepare
from paper notes or from electronic compilations of games, openings, and
positions. I don't see how it could be easier to do it the old way. The
databases per se aren't doing anything magical, they're just maintaining
these records -- and a lot more -- in an easily, readily, and quickly
accessible format. Instead of hunting for something in a book and probably
not finding it, you now have it on a computer.

An Spanish player answered in an interview that some years ago He
traveled with many chess informants, opening books and ending books to
play tournaments. Last years HE only needed his computer.

pocobueno wrote:

well that's a stunning piece of logic, congratulations...I think that might
have been a given, what do ya reckon?...****wit


Careful, people might start to think that you're me, and you wouldn't
want that.

Trust me.