I'd say this would be a very slippery slope. Let's say the game has evolved to move 24. Analysis until move 23 certainly gives additional insight into the position, but also you are only one click away from seeing the actual position and see what really would help you out. I wouldn't like it. Analysis after the game has been completed is more then fine of course.
In the start of the subject, usage of zebra to check for cheating has been mentioned. Someone playing zebra perfect for 100 games, perhaps this means something, but saying someone cheats because the beginning of the game is very zebra like is rather nonsense. Good players know lots of patterns and sometimes complete openings (sometimes: i.e. not klaashaas :-), so of course these would be played perfectly. Only solid way of finding cheaters online (IMNSHO) is talking about the game and commenting on past moves.
Personally, I think that, while playing a game, evaluating past positions with a computer gives you a huge advantage. Being suggested a move always means asking "why", and often leads to a change of strategic objectives that often have impact in the endgame, much later. Often Zebra suggests a certain move several times during a game played on the board, and if players knew that would certainly have changed their point of view. Even looking only at past opponent's moves, IMHO, gives a lot of hints on how to play. When playing on IYT I discussed a lot if it can be considered "cheating" just evaluating with a -passive- board instead of pure brain thinking on the position!
Well, the player in question is a bit stubborn, but I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees the advantage in evaluating past moves with AI-aid.
I don't know what to think of using a 'passive' board to look at your moves... In other games (hex/twixt/go) it's accepted. But the lookahead is what's so hard with reversi, and using a viewer for you lookahead makes it a alot easier (and gives a huge advantage in the endgame). I'm not sure where I stand in this, but I would definately prefer a player who doesn't use a passive board.
Call me old fashioned, but why not analyze moves with your brain??? I wouldn't go as far as calling it cheating, but I personally would have much more respect for a "top player" who DOESN'T use a program, in any part of his/her game playing.
(sakla) If you are interested in a progress of a tournament you are playing, you can discuss it with your opponents at this tournament's discussion board. (HelenaTanein) (Bütün ipuçlarını göster)