Lots of people look down on us correspondence players that use engines. The thing is that when we use engines, we are BOTH using engines. It's not so simple as turning on the engine and picking a move. Engines offer many many move options for the correspondence player to choose from - especially in the opening.
Furthermore, different players prefer different brands of engines. Each engine is different, and so your analytical assistant is offering different moves.
We still analyze the position, we still try to choose the best possible move, and we still have to think and figure out positions in our head.
I'm sick of chess players, especially on the net, looking down on correspondence players.
Thank you.
First let me start by saying that I don't look down on anyone because of their opinions on using engines in correspondence chess of all things.
Now let me explain why I think engines should be banned from all correspondence chess.
-The vast majority of engine vs engine games are drawn. This means that picking from among the best moves on each move leads to a draw FAR more often than in human play.
-Finding the best moves in a position is a huge part of the game, by just choosing among the best moves in every position this element is taken away from the game (leaving something much like chess, but not quite).
-Calculating. Another HUGE part of the game is the calculation of variations. Engines do this with far more accuracy than any human could hope to achieve. This again takes more away from the game of chess.
-I could set up a program on my computer to run the engine until 10 minutes before i flag, and then play the current best move. Using this program I won't win every game, but I will be able to win a lot with 0 human input.
-Pay to win. The rankings amongst engines are always changing with new updates coming constantly. Not everyone wants to buy Komodo 9 to compete at the highest level of correspondence chess.
The only "benefit" of having an engine is that you don't have to think as hard.
i'm fine with computer-assisted correspondence. i don't see what your rant has to do with anything though since i don't think this is a place for computer-assisted correspondence play :p
the rules for the iccf allow engines and im just salty #3
in another thread someone posted this:
"Lichess removed rating top 10 and trophies for corr. chess because Lichess cannot detect cheaters properly for that."
is this an official lichess guideline?
Assisted and unassisted play are both interesting forms of chess, but they are two different games! As #2 suggests there are potential problems...
Personally I'd like to see assisted accounts (not just computer-assisted but assisted in general) put into a separate rating pool instead of being unrated. I'd also like to see normal and variant-enabled engines in that rating pool.
#5 Of course not:
http://en.lichess.org/qa/165/use-of-computers-in-correspondence-chess#1 fully agree
#2 What engines have taken away from chess is obvious blunders. Still the player with good ideas wins more often. These ideas are not found by engines but they can be error checked using engines. Chess engines have the same purpose tractors, elevators, washing machines have. They take away the stressful and boring parts from a thing. Of course they also take away the joy from patzers who hope to beat their opponents using tricks instead of good ideas, but long term tricks are never successful in high level chess.
Three things you said are plain wrong or weird:
1) pay to win
Not true. It is not relevant if you use Stockfish or Komodo as analysis support. You need to have good ideas when you play strong players or you will be beaten, no matter which engine you use. Also, corr chess anyway is not free these days. All serious correspondence chess organisations require membership fees.
2) 0 human input can be succesful.
With such a argument you disqualify yourself. I hear it often from weaker players but its wrong.
Fact is, in high level correspondence chess an engine alone against strong players using engines will lose often, draw a few times, and quite probably never win.
3) More draws.
The chess start position _is_ draw. Are you critizising that less blunders are made?
@suitewearer #5
http://en.lichess.org/qa/422/were-the-correspondence-trophys-and-top-ten-players-removed-from-lichess" Answered 5 months ago by Hellball
It was removed because it was too difficult to monitor and keep clear of cheaters. Moreover, a lot of people play it as if it's blitz. Find like-minded players and it's not hard to get to the top by just being a good blitz player with infinite time.
It probably won't be coming back, though of course correspondence is here to stay.
To downvoters: it wasn't my decision, don't shoot the messenger!"
#8 All serious corr servers allow engines, when will lichess?
awesomer, isn't there a risk with enogh strong engines, that the ideas are somewhat "included" in the calculations
