SteveCS
Chess rating: 2380
LCF 127 Fide approx. 1885
 
United Kingdom
Give chess goodie
Chess goodies: 9 |  Wed Mar 7 2012 10:12AM | MsgID: 15250811
Originally posted by: "bnolan"
So my premise is that this is endgame analysis, performed by a computer, and published in an electronic database prior to the start of your current correspondence game, and should therefore be allowed.
|
On the face of it, a perfectly valid point and the absurd thing is that if the tablebases were printed and published in book form then use would be permitted without question. In fact, most modern endgame books have been verified by computers and so the distinction between on-screen and printed output from the computer is already blurred. Unfortunately, things are not quite as they seem.
In helping to answer the question, you drew comparison with the opening book. You say, quite correctly, that most modern opening books (paper or digital) have been engine-checked and that the use of opening books, paper or digital, is permitted. Under the premise of 'prior analysis being acceptable' your point is, at first glance, a good one.
The problems with the tablebases come when reading them;
Firstly, for most people, you need to activate the engine to check if the position on the board is in the tablebase. This is not the case for opening books.
Secondly, having found the position in the tablebases an active engine is required to read and render the data in the tablebase. Again this is not the case for the opening books.
Finally, having found that the position is not in the tablebase, your active engine will get on with analysing the position and providing continuations and evaluations.
Make of this what you will, but until a 'passive' tablebase reader is available I think the use of digital tablebases will remain a no-go area.
/S
|
 bnolan
Chess rating: 2015
LCF 1865
United States
Give chess goodie
Chess goodies: 3 | Wed Mar 7 2012 1:19AM | MsgID: 15250235
I have tried searching these forums to find a ruling on the use of endgame tablebases. I only found a few threads, with nothing conclusive. Most of the opinions were against the use of the tablebase. Because of this, I have not used a tablebase in any of my correspondence games.
Here I want to lay out my arguement in favor of allowing tablebases by comparing their origin and use to that of opening and game databases.
Allowed: Reference to historical games played by humans published in a book.
Allowed: Reference to games between a human and a computer published in a book.
Allowed: Reference to games between two computers published in a book.
Allowed: Reference to the above games published in an electronic database.
Allowed: Reference to opening analysis by a GM in a book.
Allowed: Reference to opening analysis by a GM assisted by a computer, in a book
Allowed: Reference to opening analysis entirely by computer, from a book.
Allowed: Reference to the above analysis in an electronic database.
Allowed: Reference to endgame analysis by a GM published in a book.
Allowed: Reference to endgame analysis by a GM assisted by a computer, in a book
Allowed: Reference to your own written notes and analysis (including computer analysis) of a favorite position that was generated prior to the start of any correspondence games in that opening.
What do all of these have in common? The analysis (either human or computer) was performed and published before your correspondence game began. It is historical analysis, not generated from the current position in your game.
Not Allowed: Using an analysis engine to recommend a move from your current position.
Questionable: Using an analysis engine to recommend a move from a position that could occur three or four moves in the future from your current position. (I think this should not be allowed, but I understand some of the top players on this site feel this is an acceptable practice.)
So what is an endgame tablebase? It is a database of every possible position with 6 or fewer pieces on the board. Computers were used to solve every one of these positions to either checkmate or a draw. The database simply lists the results of this analysis. In a given position, it lists each possible move, and tells for each move the result.
Here is a tablebase you can try online:
tablebase
So my premise is that this is endgame analysis, performed by a computer, and published in an electronic database prior to the start of your current correspondence game, and should therefore be allowed.
|
|
Play ... Latest Forum Posts > Chess Forums > Chess - General discussion
The case for tablebase use