Originally posted by incandenzawanna put that to the test: use a tablebase instead of a database.
By your standards, there are a lot of ignorant newbies out there, then. For example, the Shredder developers:
http://www.shredderchess.com/online-chess/online-databases/endgame-database-info.html
Also, the Wikipedia entry for "endgame database" redirects to tablebase:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endgame_database
In the first page or so of Go ...[text shortened]... our preferred meaning of a Chessbase-style database with a few notes about endgame types.
there is a clear and practical difference, and no amount of links on the internet would save you from getting banned.
I'm not sure what you're still arguing against.
The whole time, I'm arguing *against* the use of tablebases.
I am merely pointing out that the vast majority of people use the phrase "endgame database" to mean "tablebase".
Now, that may be a sloppy usage, and in the world according to wormwood it may not be allowed, but I have to accept that when people use a phrase, it probably means what the vast majority of people think it means.
I am willing to bet that there are a few people out there who think that using the Shredder endgame database is OK because it doesn't have the word "tablebase" anywhere in it. Hence I point out the actual meaning of the phrase just on the off chance there may be one of those people reading this who may be able to stay out of trouble as a result.
Maybe you're upset because my original post reads as an accusation against skeeter, in which case I apologize. I should have phrased my point in a better way.
Originally posted by chessisvanityan endgame tablebase is an engine generated exhaustive collection of solutions for all possible positions with N pieces left.
WHATS A TABLEBASE?
an endgame database is a collection of endgames that were actually played, with the continuations that actually happened.
like chigorin vs. tarrasch 1893 1-0, from the category 'R+3p, passed vs no passed pawns':
Originally posted by wormwoodHowever, let it be said that this is wormwood's personal definition, which, although reasonable, does not match the common usage.
an endgame database is a collection of endgames that were actually played, with the continuations that actually happened.
I don't have a rating here yet because I'm provisional, but if I feel like it I could probrably see as many moves ahead as I please. I think I furthest I ever looked is maybe 15 moves. It was a closed position and I was thinking into the many endgame variations.
I'm hoping my rating here will be over 1800 at least.
Originally posted by kmac27My rating on RHP just inched above 1900 again this week (I'm probably about 2000 in a USCF format). Regarding your question: How many moves ahead do I calculate? In one sense, this is a pretty easy question: I don't think about calculating moves ahead unless I'm calculating a combination. Consequently I don't calculate a combination unless someone has disrupted the equilibrium.
So I want to know from the people 1700 and above what your rating is and how many moves you think ahead when in the middle game, average, minimum and maximum.
I generally don't think of playing chess in terms of calculating. More important is evaluating your position vs. your opponent's position. After you've determined if you or your opponent has the initiative, you have to figure out where the best posting of your pieces would be, then you have to be able to properly assess their static and dynamic weaknesses and formulate a plan that comports with the position on the board. This all has to be weighed in conjunction with what your opponent is doing. If neither side has disrupted the equilibrium, then you just have to continue maneuvering to gain an advantage in position. In the endgame, you have to know if you're playing for the win, defending against a loss or playing for a draw. This determines the posting of the pieces and the character of your plan. Sometimes, your opponent plays a bad move or even a surprise move that you hadn't calculated and the game ends differently you'd presumed. Sometimes the position is so original or illogical or tactical that one has to rely on intuition instead of calculation. That's why we all keep coming back: The game is inexhaustible.
Back to the original question: I can probably play six moves ahead without aid of a board. Studying Pawn endings without a board is a great way to learn how to calculate. If you can see three moves ahead, that generally is enough to play a creditable game. If you want to get better at calculating, blindfold chess is probably the best way to improve your skills. I once read that Botvinnik played a lot of checkers and Lasker played a lot of the Japanese game Go to improve their calculating skills. There is no magic bullet, you just have to do a lot of studying.
Originally posted by wormwoodNo, again you are wrong.
and the bottom line is: acting according to 'your' definition will get you banned, where as acting by 'my' definition will not.
Acting according to my definition, which is "endgame database" == "tablebase", will keep you OK.
It is ignorance of this definition, which is what you're proposing, that could lead to you getting banned.
If someone only knew the definitions you provided above, they would not understand this.
Originally posted by incandenzatry it.
No, again you are wrong.
Acting according to my definition, which is "endgame database" == "tablebase", will keep you OK.
It is ignorance of this definition, which is what you're proposing, that could lead to you getting banned.
If someone only knew the definitions you provided above, they would not understand this.
Originally posted by wormwoodTry what? Realizing that an endgame database such as the Shredder one is a tablebase, therefore I cannot use it? That's what I'm already doing.
try it.
It appears you are deliberately misunderstanding me, so I guess I'll have to give up here.