Tournament designers---check into Chess and ChessVariants Clearinghouse to get info to chess players of all tags.

Any chess players interested in joining a chess tournament commencing in May can join up here, I have created 2 tournaments: one with a BKR greater than 1900 (no unrated players) and one with a BKR less than 2000 (no unrated players). Any person who is in between 1900 and 2000 can join where he or she feel they belong. I have created 2 links at the bottom of this message. Good luck to all that enter.

Over 1900 Chess Tournament
Under 2000 Chess Tournament

(15,30,45,60 min for the whole game) together at the same server : www.schacharena.de It is a playing without client,only webbased but unfortunately only in the German language till now.Perhaps can we have both possibilities of playing here in Bk too anytime?

Hi, I have a fundamental question:
We are here playing some sort of correspondence chess, right? It is clear, that no computer programs (Fritz, ChessMaster etc.) are allowed, no doubt. But is it ok to consult books and/or databases, especially in the opening, or would it be considered as cheating?
If doing my moves from home, I'm looking often into NCO/BCO and I don't think, I'm doing something against the rules. But I'm asking the audience to be sure (and eventually to stop it).

surprisingly enough there seems to be no rule here against outside help in any form. unlike other sites, Fencer seems to adopt the sensible attitude that since you can't check or enforce it, there's no point in having a rule against it.

there are several good players here that declare openly that they are in "cyborg" mode (that is, basically, human aided by program).


you'll find that correspondence chess clubs have varying attitudes towars computer aided play. one club I belong to, IECC, has adopted the rule that calculating moves is forbidden, but database search is equivalent to book search, and therefore allowed. as for me, I've adopted the same principle.

bishop, the only way to be assured that you're not playing against help, consultation or electronic, is to play Dark Chess. Otherwise, it's totally up in the air. I know of many players here rated 2100+ that have admitted to cyborging. If dark doesn't suit you, try ones with weaker progs such as anti, amazons or ones where no one uses progs, like backgammon!

If you study the rules of Brainking you can see that there are no prohibitions to use any helps.
Neither books,nor databases,nor computerprograms. So like you say we play a kind of correspondence chess here and the International Correspondence Chess (ICCF) rules also have no prohibitions (alike the rules of our German national federation - Bdf).
So it is not cheating to use any kind of helps.

The simple problem is if you make prohibitions you must have a real control! And this control ist not possible in correspondence chess until now. That`s why it is better to have no prohibitions, otherwise you make the most players to cheaters and this cannot make sense.

For people who are against all kind of helps they can play "Livechess" (face to face) at www.playchess.com,www.icc.com, www.chessgate.de (the last is for free),where all kind of helps are completely forbidden.

Redsales: No, no, I have no problem with playing against any sort of help, I'd say it's problem of the other player if he/she want serve only as an output device for some engine or a servant for somebody third. I'm trying (well, with little effort :-)) to improve MY PLAY and it doesn't really matter, wheather my opponent is using any sort of help (even Fritz) or not. We are not playing for money or eternal fame, are we? ;-) -- I'm only asking to be sure *I'm not breaking any rule or agreement here* if I'm ocassionally using books or/and database. I think, Rabbitoid answered my question (Thanks for the answer, R.!) exactly so as I understand the habits. I needn't have a guilty conscience about using my library or database.

It is a general problem of online chess playing communities, that some pleople use their chess programs as seconds.
I know some chess communities, and always after some time it was clear, when somebody used a program. So the community admin was contacted and he deleted the computer player.
In my opinion it is OK to take some looks in books, e.g. for opening variations or for endgames. Sometimes I also check online opening repositories, such as chess base.
But if someone ONLY use a program to play, it is fatal, should not be allowed. Now, we cannot control this, but as I wrote: After some time it will get clear, if somebody only use a program.
We should be honest, and I always tell my opponent, if the time for the next move will be longer, because I want to anlyze the game deeper. In one case I also used Fritz to check an endgame but I previous declared, that I want to draw the game.

Schachmdmt, that is the problem : You cannot know how often the user looks in the chessprogram, only one time,two times or always.In one game he has easy positions in the next game the positions are very complicated for him.
The same is to differentiate between using database (like Chessbase) and chessprogram (like Fritz).You can also use Chessbase with an engine and Fritz as database too.You must put only one button and therefor this all is "wishi-washi".
Me for myself I would welcome if a l l players would play without programs.But this is completely unrealistic, because you cannot look in the player`s living-room.That`s why it is better to have no kind of prohibitions and every player should play with the helps,which he wants.This is the official point of view of the ICCF at the moment,because the chances are equal again.

BB: As many player's prefer games without computer moves for either side but cannot guarantee such will be the case, you can request that type of game in a text message when placing a new game in the waitng area. If you suspect that someone was using a computer anyway, then you can just avoid playing them anymore. A good indicator is when their level of play changes dramatically at some point during the game, usually when they see they are headed for losing. I don't think anyone frowns upon the use of opening books or data bases. They help improve our skills and at some point we must leave the book and grasp understanding of the position we are playing.

This discussion has been around before and will be around again. All the points made are valid. My recollection was that it would be acceptable for people to use whatever aids they wanted to, but, to be polite, they should state what aids they do use, particularly if asked ... but there is no certainty in a cyber world.

My preference is to play variations where the use of a program is of little value as the software is either non-existant or insufficiently adavanced to be of consequence. I also like to play these variations as it tends to bring the "masters" a little back to the field as they do not have any "books" in either their mind or written to follow.

WhisperzQ is right...there is always a chance you'll be playing a prog. Maybe there is even one for dark chess out there. But most variants have very weak progs that 1600-1700 level players can beat consistently. Personally I am rated lowest in progable games, so I think I'm playing against progs, but it doesn't bother me, there are always ways to steer clear of them. Or, as BB said, you can take the enlightened attitude that you don't mind playing them no matter what.

and why couldn't there be a dark chess program? the difference is only in the evaluation which is based on probabilities rather than real positions. I don't know if anyone actually wrote one, but the project sounds interresting. I'll try to do it myself, the next time I'm young again...

and there ARE backgammon playing programs.

if i could program better, i'd take a shot at dark..it would be a real challenge.

Btw,it was Kasparows suggestions for a new form of an otb-tournement some years ago: He suggested that the two players should play with a computerprogram (as "centaur") against eachother. He called this chess "advanced chess"....

As "centaur"? Who in the tandem is the brain and who is the ass? :-)

Hmmm, actually not a bad idea... If I'm not wrong, the most chess programs can suggest more possible moves and the "operator" has to choose one of them.

a life form consisting of 6 or more legs and no brain

Topically to this theme :

"Freestyle Blitz Tournament on August 7, 2004
Ingo Althofer und Timo Klaustermeyer

To win blitz games by the help of programs or grandmasters counts as cheating. Not so here! In our Freestyle Tournament teams with arbitrary composition are invited. If Kasparov is just sitting on your couch, please, let him help. Or take proposals by Shredder or Junior. All possible participants are welcome: single humans, single computers, but also teams
with arbitrarily many humans and computers and arbitrary decision structures.
Short Description

7 rounds CH-system with 7 min + 2 sec/move thinking time;
Organizers: Prof. Dr. Ingo Althofer and Timo Klaustermeyer Venue: ChessBase Server (Schach.de)
Begin: Saturday, August 7, 2004, 15:00 h Middle European Summer Time
Address for Applications: freestyleblitz@web.de
Deadline for application: Tuesday, August 3, 2004, 20:00 h
Notification for Participants: until Wednesday, August 4, 2004, 22:00 h
Limitation: At most 40 teams will play
Teams from all over the world are invited.
Event languages are German and English.

In the sequel each participant will be called "team".
In the application the following data have to be given:

(a) true name of the team-leader (the team leader has to be a human), postal address and email address.
The address data will be treated confidentially and not given to other persons.

(b) name of the ChessBase account of the team

Also in case of single computer programs a human has to be the team leader!

Prizes
1. Rank: 500 ChessBase Dukates
2. Rank: 250 ChessBase Dukates
3. Rank: 125 ChessBase Dukates

For the ranking within the CH-system the server software and its "fine-rankings" are used. Prizes are not split.

Important
Each team really has only 7 minutes + 2 sec/move, as is counted down by the Server clock. There are no bonus times
for communication within a team.

The referee panel for the Freestyle Tournament consists of the following three persons:
Ingo Althofer, Lars Bremer, Timo Klaustermeyer

Cheaters, be warned!
"Freestyle" only means that the use of computers and human team members is legal. But, this does not hold for tricks of manipulation. For instance, collecting thinking time or stealing time from the opponent by network tricks is forbidden. Cheaters will be excluded without possibility of revision.
Right of Secrecy
Nobody has to lay open the structure or members of his team.
However, we would be happy, when after the event many participants report about their teams and experiences.
A last word
When this experimental tournament runs well, there will probably be successor events for Freestyle blitz."

- did I get that right actually ? ~*~

There was nothing mentioned about fees.

never've tried 'active' blitz - thought it takes more time typing than it gives chances ~*~

There is a new chess tournament for people of all levels ready for sign up today if you are interested. Good luck.

Where is this tournament listed ? Didn't see it in Tournament list.

I took it down to change some items. Going back up tonight. Thanks for the interest.

Thank You, I am signed up. :-)

Who are the people who openly admit to using computer programs?? So I can avoid them.

QuoUsque: Wow, I didn't know that checkers is so sofisticated game with special openings, historical games and so on - as chess, for me it was just a game for kids. I looked at Amazon now and I've found (and ordered :-)) two books about checkers. It's very interesting, thanks for your posting! :-)

Ad computerized chess players: To be honest, I like more and more the Kasparov's idea of "advanced chess" mentioned by Cassius. I'd like to try (at least) one game with computer support, rated or not, against some man&machine opponent. Anyone interested?

I am curious to what you mean by that Ed???

are useful idiots, I agree. Chess programs have been a first approach to some
artificial intelligence in british colleges after WW2 ... egoshooters say thank you. ~*~

9 posts deleted ... please do not flame on this public board.

Again to the theme "using computers in correspondence chess" a statement from the "Faq" of the German Correspondence Chess federation (Bdf) in the original language(without comment,perhaps can anybody translate?):

Es dürfen alle Hilfsmittel eingesetzt werden, angefangen bei Büchern, fortgesetzt über Schachdatenbanken, selbst Computerschachprogramme dürfen eingesetzt werden (deren Nutzen im Fernschach aber insbesondere von wenig erfahrenen Spielern oder Außenstehenden deutlich überschätzt wird). Natürlich hat auch der eine oder andere Vereinskamerad beim Spielabend des örtlichen Schachvereins den einen oder anderen guten Tipp.
Beim Fernschach stand und steht der wissenschaftliche Aspekt der "Suche nach der schachlichen Wahrheit" noch weit mehr im Vordergrund als im Nahschach. Deshalb war der Einsatz jeglicher Hilfsmittel und die Beteiligung von anderen Spielern stets erlaubt (hinsichtlich der Computerprogramme kontrovers diskutiert; diese waren zunächst nicht zugelassen). Die Möglichkeit, aufgrund der großzügigen Bedenkzeit und der erlaubten Nutzung beliebiger verfügbarer Ressourcen leichte Fehler zu vermeiden und hoch qualifizierte Partien zu spielen, macht einen besonderen Reiz des Fernschachspiels aus.

Zu bedenken ist in diesem Zusammenhang, dass selbst dann, wenn ein Verbot des Computereinsatzes bestehen würde, dessen Einhaltung ohnehin praktisch nicht kontrollierbar und zu ahnden wäre.
Der Computereinsatz beim Fernschach sollte so verstanden werden, dass er den Spieler bei dessen eigenen Analysen hilfreich durch Zugvorschläge oder Nachprüfung unterstützt, aber keinesfalls anstelle des Spielers die Partie spielt. In dem Augenblick nämlich, wo ein Fernschachspieler zum Handlanger seines Computers wird und der Zug nicht mehr Produkt seiner geistigen Schöpfung ist, wird das Fernschachspiel für ihn zu Farce. Schon bald wird dann ein solcher Schachfreund sich nicht mehr über den Sieg seines Computers freuen können; vielmehr wird er sich über die sinnlosen Porto- oder Onlinekosten und die Zeitverschwendung mehr und mehr ärgern und den Computer beiseite stellen.

in my high time of correspondance in the 80s, people told you after all
whether they are using a program or not - during those years they could compete
only with amateur-1-level though - usually rank 2-3 in groups - saw none winning. ~*~

According to the "advanced chess" as mentioned here earlier: I'm playing now on playchess.de, where one can play in the "human chess league" (computer support not allowed) and/or in the "advance chess league" (computer support allowed) and/or in "computer chess league" (human support not allowed). I'm playing now, after few HCL games, in one ACL tourney. And to be honest -- it's quite boring... :-)

i'm online,do you think we can finish this game?

The program - end of 2003 still sold as Pro-Deo ( $50 ) -
is freeware now ... It's downloadable from Schroeder's homepage
- about 3.5 MB - the engine works in chessbase and chesspartner ... ~*~

<>the engine works in chessbase and chesspartner ...

It works also on Arena and Winboard (They are both free, Chessbase and Chesspartner aren't), to be completely true.....

I shall look over that due to the language barrier ... 0:)
got the fritz 5.32 in a games collection (15 CDs €5) and also
as sponsor-cd in a magazine ... almost free :D rebelfritz works. ~*~

Any interrest in loop chess? a tournament will start next monday, provided enough people show up... click here

hello wanna play a game ??????????

Hello, I'll play a game of regular chess. Send me an invite.

AlexII recently sent me a message to which I cannot reply since I am in his enemies list. So I guess I will reply here since his questions to me seemed sincere.

========

My name really is Ed Trice. In the past, I have defeated World Computer Champions in the game of chess (Deep Thought) and checkers (Chinook). I think I am the only human to have done so.

Ed Trice vs. Deep Thought

Wall of Honor against Chinook

For the Wall of Honor link, you have to scroll down a little to find my name.

I have also played against strong chess players, like the legendary GM Sammy Reshevsky (a game I lost in the Sicilian Defense in 1989, but if you search in Google, you will find this game too.) I drew Greg Shahade (2502) in a very interesting Smith-Morra Gambit line. I have had 3 other games published in Chess Life in the 1980's, but I cannot recall them at this point.

You can review my profile and see the games I have played against others. You will see I have scored wins against players at the top, not merely the "weak" players. I actively seek out the strongest of the strong in order to better myself.

I gave you two pieces at the start of this game in the very unusual Double Muzio line of the King's Gambit. In my analysis, white's line in the openin book was bad, but I found the draw, which is this position. I can force the swap of your Bishop for two pawns, and exchange off the rest.

You came close to winning at one point, but I have played this line 1,000 times, and the draw is rather straightforward.

If you wish to play on, that is OK too, but the end result will be a draw.

Best Regards,

Ed Trice

A really ridicoulous statement from a player,who always offers draw in completely lost positions (against me as well) combined with threats and offences.We know you meanwhile,Edtrice.

I always offer draws in completely lost positions? Last time I checked I had 0 in the loss column.

And here is the last draw I offered, which was accepted.

complex draw in checkers

Please explain to me how this is a win,

O mighty caissus!

Or perhaps you were mentioning this game:

Ed beats Caissus

Wasn't that the game your were trying to draw that I beat you?

I think you are not one to judge whether a game is a draw or not.

No,I thought at our 2nd Gothic Chess game :

[White "GothicChessPro"]
[Black "Caissus"]

1.Nj3 d5 2.h3 Nh6 3.g4 f6 4.f4 i6 5.Bf3 Bi7 6.Cd3 Af7 7.c4 c6 8.cxd5 cxd5 9.Nc3 e6 10.Ni5 0-0 11.Ah2 j6 12.Nj3 Nd7 13.Rg1 Qe7 14.b3 g5 15.Nb5 Nc5 16.Ba3 Nxd3 17.Bxe7 Cxe7 18.exd3 Bd7 19.Nc7 Rac8 20.f5 exf5 21.Nxd5 Axd5 22.Bxd5 Cxd5 23.Rg3 f4 24.Rg2 Bb5 25.Kg1 Bxd3 26.Af3 Cd6 27.Rf2 Re8 28.Rc1 Nf7 29.Kh2 Ne5 30.Ag1 f5 31.Rxc8 Rxc8 32.Cxf5 - +

In this game you offered draw after the 31. move (please see the position),I declined ....and one move later the game was deleted!

Even I could win from AlexII's position.

And with that said we might move on please ... analysis of the game will be acceptable (after it is finished of course) but until then we should let them play it out in peace (however long it takes).

I believe Alex can force zugzwang to win. Of course anyone'd offer the draw, there's no chance to win!

For either side, there is no chance to win. That's what a draw is.

i much prefer his chances. That's ok, losing makes us more human.