Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old December 23rd 06, 03:09 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 446
Default Any evidence for improvement with databases?

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)
  #2   Report Post  
Old December 23rd 06, 04:07 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 446
Default Any evidence for improvement with databases?

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)
  #3   Report Post  
Old December 23rd 06, 04:32 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 162
Default Any evidence for improvement with databases?

En/na Dave (from the UK) ha escrit:
Is there any *hard* evidence that computer Chess databases improve one's
chess?


Databases can help you the study of several aspects:

1) Openings research.

It's easier to study a concrete line knowing what happened in played
games not only as usefuol examples but also as evidence os research of
concrete players.

2) Endings study.

From practical ending we can undertand better some aspects od endgame
play. And from concrete stititics we can evaluate better some concrete
endings.

3) Middlegame study.

If you are interested in a concrete theme (as example fight 3 pieces vs
3 rooks) you can obtain many examples and ideas from databases.

But that do not mean databases have no problems:
- Some people devote more time to ramdom visits to his database than to
serious study.
- Some people devote more time to add games to his database than to
serious study.
....
But generaly the problem is in the user not in the tool

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."


Of course a coach can be very useful and a coach with a complete
database devoted to teach can be more useful.

Antonio

  #4   Report Post  
Old December 23rd 06, 04:33 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 162
Default Any evidence for improvement with databases?

En/na Antonio Torrecillas ha escrit:
En/na Dave (from the UK) ha escrit:

Is there any *hard* evidence that computer Chess databases improve
one's chess?


A similar question can be asked for chess engines.
:-)

  #5   Report Post  
Old December 23rd 06, 07:38 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2006
Posts: 10
Default Any evidence for improvement with databases?

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?


  #6   Report Post  
Old December 23rd 06, 10:16 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2005
Posts: 654
Default Any evidence for improvement with databases?


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)


  #7   Report Post  
Old December 23rd 06, 10:48 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,598
Default Any evidence for improvement with databases?

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!
  #8   Report Post  
Old December 23rd 06, 10:50 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,598
Default Any evidence for improvement with databases?

Antonio Torrecillas wrote:
Databases can help you the study of several aspects:

3) Middlegame study.

If you are interested in a concrete theme (as example fight 3 pieces
vs 3 rooks) you can obtain many examples and ideas from databases.


That sounds like a pretty specialized case. Three pieces vs two rooks
might be a little more common. ;-)


Dave.

--
David Richerby Perforated Mouldy Ghost (TM): it's
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ like a haunting spirit but it's
starting to grow mushrooms and full
of holes!
  #9   Report Post  
Old December 23rd 06, 11:52 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 162
Default Any evidence for improvement with databases?

En/na David Richerby ha escrit:
Antonio Torrecillas wrote:

Databases can help you the study of several aspects:

3) Middlegame study.

If you are interested in a concrete theme (as example fight 3 pieces
vs 3 rooks) you can obtain many examples and ideas from databases.



That sounds like a pretty specialized case. Three pieces vs two rooks
might be a little more common. ;-)

Dave.


I'm sorry, ... typo error :-)
I wrote that concrete example because I studied it not log ago.

AT


  #10   Report Post  
Old December 24th 06, 06:56 AM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2005
Posts: 589
Default Any evidence for improvement with databases?


"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.


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Evidence of Gender Bias in USCF Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\ rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 1 October 3rd 06 12:23 PM
Evidence of Election Fraud Grows in México : wen.kroy rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 0 August 3rd 06 05:44 PM
Why are the Hardinge-Simpole titles priced the way they are? Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 160 January 10th 06 01:25 PM
Why are the Hardinge-Simpole titles priced the way they are? Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 163 January 10th 06 01:25 PM
Chess databases Andy alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 2 October 8th 03 01:02 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017