♡ 39 ( +1 | -1 ) Nigel Short's opinion,I was just perusing an interview with GM Nigel Short and noted his reply when asked his opinion on internet chess compared to OTB chess. He said "It is fertile ground for cheating". It seemed a bit cynical from a man who reputedly has played quite a lot of internet chess. I wonder why that would be his only comment on the subject. What about all the good facets? Any thoughts, people?
♡ 44 ( +1 | -1 ) Isn't it true, though?There's no doubt that internet chess has been a boon--how else could the bulk of us here find a partner for some casual blitz games at the drop of a hat? But the anonymity of the internet combined with its inherent computerization ("They have the internet on computers now?") makes it exactly as Short suggests.
But the success of 'net chess speaks for itself. It's become part of the fabric of the game, and there's no turning back the clock.
♡ 75 ( +1 | -1 ) i'm withbrilliance on this as always someone always focuses on the negative aspects. What about all the 1,000's of games played by people who are not in a position to attend a chess club on a regular basis, (or be able to swan around the world playing chess), that are played in the true spirit of the game?
Since i have joined GK i have met people from all over the world played some really good chess games (which are improving all the time as i get less rusty), and had great fun discussing various issues in the forums/clubs.
My questions to Mr Short would be did he ever cheat when he played on the net? Are there no positive aspects about chess on the net that out weigh the one he has highlighted!
♡ 177 ( +1 | -1 ) The ICCF does not allow....computer usage they just do not mention anywhere in the rules that computer usage is not allowed. So in essence using a computer is not breaking any rules.
They allow it by not saying it is not allowed. :-)
In fact, the Master and GMs that play with ICCF think computer usage against them is actually a help to them.
The notion that Fritz or any program is unbeatable is really a myth. The program that beat Kasparov was not played on a home computer. It was played on a computer that was built specifically for the event and I am sure had many processors.
The bottom line is this, today's correspondence chess be it via postal, email or internet brings the game back to many people that for any number of reasons can not get to play OTB. Be it health problems, distances to travel etc.
The computer has been both a good thing for chess and a bad thing at the same time. It brings chess to many more people and it also brings the shadow that everyone is cheating which is a bad thing. If people believe that then it is best they do not play because they could never really enjoy the game.
I have been playing correspondence chess since the late '50s. I started out with the USCF postal tournaments then in the '90's I started email play with different orgs including the USCF. Then in '97 I retired & purchased my first computer and started play via email.
Today I still play some postal chess with the USCF, some email with the USCF and the ICCF. Now I am also a TD for the ICCF on their webserver. Chess is how I pass most of my retired time. I really enjoy it and have met many people and became pretty close friends with some.
♡ 18 ( +1 | -1 ) coyotefan,It was on www.chessbase.com, currently about 3 items from the top of the home page. I would appreciate your comments after you have read the article, either here or by pm. Thanks.
♡ 52 ( +1 | -1 ) daverundle,The comment I quoted was the only comment that was reported in the article, and it seemed like a bolt out of the blue, and somewhat unbecoming of a GM which is why I broached the subject here. I,m sure that at his level he would have no need for concern about computer programmes being used against him. In my opinion the whole article seemed almost to be aimed at putting him in a bad light. If it was, I think he deserves better treatment than that. His achievements have earned him some respect I would have thought.
♡ 16 ( +1 | -1 ) muppymanbut Nigel has many strange and wondrous opinions out there, I'm sure. It seems like they could have done a better job of putting him in a bad light }8-)
♡ 12 ( +1 | -1 ) Oops, sorry bout that ....thats not sugarandspice comment ... but indeed was mine.
♡ 15 ( +1 | -1 ) craig,Why does that not surprise me? :) Actually Nigel was in New Zealand a couple of weeks ago and played a simul in Christchurch. I am glad I didn't pay for a place and play him.
♡ 30 ( +1 | -1 ) muppymanI was going to point to a sight with some Nigel quotes from British Google ... but my browser can hold only one "copy" at a time, and the ANAGRAMS was much funnier, thus :) .... -> www.anagramgenius.com
♡ 12 ( +1 | -1 ) PS...and not to forget to look under the anagrams there of Nigel David Short :)) And some of the other GM's. Funny stuff :))
♡ 30 ( +1 | -1 ) you arevery cynical muppyman are you suggesting that the free press does not report the whole story but rather their version/abbrieviated story? I am shocked that the upholders of freedom & democracy could be regarded with this type of cynicism!
But you are almost certainly correct!!!
♡ 18 ( +1 | -1 ) It IS...... a fertile ground for cheating...whether anyone actually cheats is neither here nor there, there still exists the possibility, and that is what Mr. Short was getting at.
♡ 37 ( +1 | -1 ) What about all the good facets?I find meaning through my involvement in various cyberspace communities, Gameknot being simply one of them. Through the Internet, I become a member of the global village. Without it, I would simply be a citizen of some cultural backwater/provincial town. Whether people here sometimes cheat me out of points--a purely illusory concept--is entirely incidental.
♡ 46 ( +1 | -1 ) Not so much...I'm not too much concern of cheating in internet chess . Maybe because as I'm not a high level player, anyone playind "aided" will be quite noticeable.
I suppouse tha for near 2000 Elo and higher the problem will be real.
Anyway, I think we must be confident in other people.
If we lost some elo points and a pair of matches with some "ill" player... is it really terrible?. I think he damages his more.
As far as I know, internet chess is just for fun.
♡ 104 ( +1 | -1 ) When you live in rural Maine,and maybe that is a redundant statement, the opportunities to play chess with even average players is sparse. I did attend a local chess club when my work schedule permitted it where the competition was tough and the atmosphere was friendly. Our club consisted of less than 10 people though. When I brought my sons and their friend, we usually made up half of the club. There has been only one USCF rated tourny locally in many years. Anything else and I would have to drive 1-2 hours if not more and then the tourneys are usually on Saturdays and Sundays which rules me out. GameKnot, USCF Live, and other sites have opened the chance for me to play anytime of the day, any day of the week, any week of the month, and any month of the year. I have no worry about finding players who are more than able to teach me by beating me and I enjoy the interaction during the games. As far as cheating is concerned, I don't worry about it at all. If a GM makes an off of the cuff remark about cheating, that's ok. Take care.