only "official sites" allow, on all corr. sites I know, the use of software is (fortunately IMHO) strictly forbidden, i. e.
-gameknot
-redhotpawn
-chess.com
-chesssworld
-chessmaniac
-schemingmind
-chesscorner
-itsyourturn, stansco, net-chess etc.
LOL awesomer. engines have taken over the stressful and boring part of chess. Just send your engine to the chessclub playing your games
LOL #12 keep making cheap jokes and inventing things i never said about OTB chess.
The true reason why you and other patzers dont like engines in correspodence chess is that you will never again win a game against a stronger player due to a blunder by him.
Why not try poker? It fits better to your mental state, LOL
engines (by doing error checking) add more math and remove some mystery from chess. That is why many people dont like. That is ok, they can play without engines. But forcing others to deny the math (in correspondence chess), thats irrational.
Answering #13
Calculating tactics is a challenging and funny part of chess that require skills. If you blame your incapabilities in that like saying " I am more skilled but made a blunder" you are a pathetic and a weak soul. The reason that you did a "blunder" are actually a lack of tactical calculating skills.
Also in many cases you have to chose one of many plans, rather than find a plan. Finding the right plan is then often a matter of calculations.
awesomer, calculations is not the "dirty job" and you are not doing the "smart job requiring skills." That's your way to blame your incapabilities of something on anything else.
If I were to enter an <<OFFICIAL>> Correspondence Chess league and all I ever did was running my computer day and night for letting my multiple engines analyze every .... literally every !! move I made (I wouldn't even have to know how the game works for that), please explain to me how I could possibly ever lose?
I realize that almost nobody goes to these extremes, but I actually feel tempted to see how far I could climb in the ratings after, let's say, two or three years of that practice.
rise_UIED, that's indeed an interesting question. I don't deny that a human can improve a computers playing. I just think tactics also is a part of chess and not a "dirty engine job"
#15 a) losing a game because of a lot of small mistakes made because of a misunderstanding of the position is a different thing than b) losing it because of one big blunder.
Most games lost by strong players against much weaker ones are lost because of b).
In correspondence chess b) virtually never happens while a) is common.
That was what i meant.
www.iccf.com/Message.aspx?message=225may be of interest to anyone. Im out.
As rise pointed out, a person who doesn't even the know the rules of chess can compete with the best correspondence players, so what's the point of actually playing?
It makes sense to allow books into the equations, but chess engines ?? that does 99.99% of things for you.