A Chess forum. ChessBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ChessBanter forum » Chess Newsgroups » rec.games.chess.play-by-email (Chess - Play by Email)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Old topic, more discussion



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 29th 06, 06:15 PM posted to rec.games.chess.play-by-email
Pedro Saavedra
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Old topic, more discussion

The issue of what constitutes assistance in correspondence or e-mail
chess remains one I have had to deal with for the last forty years.
The problem is that some of us study openings in a group or like to
play certain lines against our computers and those tend to be lines we
play.

A case and point before there were chess programs. In a correspondence
game we got to a position in the Najdorf where my opponent left the
book line. I used to play the Najdorf all the time in speed chess
against a friend, and knew I could get into that position taking my
opponent's side. Would that have been ethical? How about doing it
over several games? What if we had had an analysis group in my chess
club, could I have asked "What about ...?"

I recently got a book on a particular opening. I often used the book
as I play against a computer. What are my obligations if I am playing
a game following the book? Should I stop playing that opening with my
computer altogether if I play in a thematic?

Clearly having my computer choose my moves is no fun and I would not
want to do it, but if one uses the computer to study an opening or
plays that line against a computer, is that assistance? It is OK by
most rules to use a book on an opening, but how about attending a
lecture and then asking a question? I know there are extreme views on
both sides, but are there guidelines that are in-between?

These issues have been with correspondence players longer than e-mail
or chess playing programs. I am wondering if any (obviously
unenforceable) more precise rules would make sense. One example would
be a prohibition against discussing the opening or playing the line
when it is your turn to move, but allowing it in anticipation of your
opponent's response.Another would prohibit settng the position beyond
where you have a book line, but allows one to try to entice the
computer or opponent to play that line. I like to abide by the rules,
but the rules have always carried some ambiguity for me since the days
when I played

Has anybody found a good discussion of these issues, or am I the only
old timer who obsesses about them?

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
700+ MEMBER CHESS DISCUSSION GROUP! Frank Lee rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 0 June 10th 06 11:55 AM
700+ MEMBER CHESS DISCUSSION GROUP! Frank Lee rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 0 June 10th 06 11:55 AM
700+ MEMBER CHESS DISCUSSION GROUP! Frank Lee rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 0 June 10th 06 11:55 AM
700+ MEMBER CHESS DISCUSSION GROUP! Frank Lee rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 June 10th 06 11:55 AM
a new Correspondence Chess discussion group JohnnyBob rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 January 9th 06 04:09 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:49 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2014 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.