Pafl: *nod*

Hrqls: Good point. I think everyone agrees on defining it as using an outside PC (or Mac :-) program, created by someone else, for the purpose of gaining advantage in one particular game (which does not include "gaining advantage" by playing against the program & thus improving your general chess skills).
This way is correct, I believe, and Sumerian is thus out of the category (which is correct too, I believe).

Looks like the paragraph needs to be better defined.

is it cheating to look in previous games of yourself and use that knowledge in your current game ?

is it cheating to use a table of chances of 2 dice (as i know some people in backgammon, although you can easily do that in your mind as well)

would it be cheating to have a chessboard next to your computer, setup the game you are playing, and test-play several moves ahead ?

is it cheating to use notes ?

all this can be considered using outside 'programs'

,,but the anser is that i have declined every invite not only from you..nothing personal..until now when you said to my intelligent posts
..kidding...have to find "Dancing Queen" for my daughter now...take care

Andersp: you and i used to play alot..then for some reason you decided you didnt like me anymore, we never had a prob to my knowledge.
But you've declined evey invite i've sent you in the last 6 months.
Why?

sLaMdAnCe: thats beat you in what?

Purple: What's it matter if the game is over? A little late to get help, ain't it? It certainly isn't cheating by any definition of the word that I know of. It's the same as looking over a game you've already played. One of the things that the Chess playing machine do is used old games and data bases to look up and compare a position in the case that it's been played before. That to me is cheating, but that is allowed in tournaments where programs are permitted to play. This is one thing that makes Sumerian's type of program different from a lot of others is that it plays on the fly and just wings its moves. It's still a machine, but it is a different approach to programming.

Andersp: MiGht i SuGgESt iNsTeAd oF tRyiNg tO bAIt Me, tRy To bEAt Me.

sLaMdAnCe: You have noooooo idea how nice Antje is
Purple Im not saying im right..just curious about Fencer's opinion

Andersp: LOL. I'm not saying you are wrong at all but I'm suggesting you save some of the outrage for people who are programming and keeping quiet about it.

Andersp: wOw.
aNtJe iZ So nICe.
hMMmm..gO fiGuRe.

Andersp: lol
i pLAy 2 gAMEz hERe.
BG & hYpEr.
Go LoOk aNd sEe My tRiCe LiKe ReCoRd.

Purple: Is there an engine to make "smileys" so Slam could increase his word supply?

There are "learning" programs that analyze completed games and pin point mistakes after the game is over. How do people feel about that? Is that also cheating?

Stevie:

sLaMdAnCe: another honest person

Andersp:

Purple and Walter: ..little i know about

Andersp: Er, ah, I thought it was full of engines, machines, and programs now? No?

Andersp: It already is.

Andersp: I'd be willing to bet there's already some on the market now. Lots of programs play lots of games. Even this Windows© machine that I use came with a few games. Somewhere around here I have two game programs ChessMaster5500 and EA Bridge. That fact that I can't beat the ChessMaster5500 is one of the reason I don't play Chess on this site. Not much use in it is there? And it's an older version. I imagine their newest version is really strong and fast compared to the one I have. The Bridge playing program is disappointing because it plays so poorly! Apparently games that require deduction, bluff, and intuition are a lot harder to program than games that have perfect information in them as Chess does. I have read in magazines that current Bridge playing programs have greatly improved their play and features since the one that I own was released. As for Backgammon, I wouldn't bother making one on your own. It won't play all that much better than a decent player even it played the game perfectly. It'd take a long time to show that it played better than you do. You ought to take up Dark Chess. As far as I know there aren't any programs in use for making the moves, plus the game cannot be watched by an outsider until the game is over. And even if your opponent gave his password to a friend to help him make a move, his friend would only see your opponent's side of the board and he'd be in the same boat as your original opponent. The game has a little luck to it and a weaker player actually has a chance against a strong player which is never the case in regular Chess.

One thing this whole argument seems to have missed is the fact that none of us are directly playing a person. We're all using machines to play the games with. Just wait until the programs can make conversation too. :(

Sumerian: Vielleicht sollen wir Deutch sprechen? kidding :) Dont misunderstand me please..i told you that you absolutely should test your engine..BUT,,isnt there a risk that BK soon is full of "engines" if Fencer allows one?

Andersp: Maybe my understanding of English is poor, I am from Old Germany. Seeing you being that engaged discussing using an 8x8 and 10x8 chess engine, you did not gave that impression to me. And if you vice versa would be willing to think my arguments over, you will easyly come to the conclusion, that there will be a big difference in using self written engines or external know how.

Walter Montego: I dont know...maybe i chould create one

Andersp: Even one that plays Backgammon?

Sumerian: LOL..Is my english so poor. You have missed my point completely.
So again...IF Fencer says OK to this engine i suppose he has to say OK to all "followers".
Think i said somewhere that i am no chessplayer so i havent signed up for the tourney you link to..but im sure there can be engines in other games too and i can tell you that IF i know that i play a computer then i would resign the game at once.

Andersp: If you would like to participate in tournaments without Smirf present, why did you not have entered in the European Chess960 Quick Motivation Tournament http://brainking.com/game/Tournaments?trg=7146&tri=29371&trnst=0 , where I offer to the winner a Chess960 book I have written myself?

I would love to play against Smirf in a Halma 8x8 prize tournament.
A couple of people I play against now are just like computers.

Andersp: Of course that goes without saying. The pressure coming from here however is quite another thing. The pressure is "don't tell." He is getting that message loud and clear. Once it was done I think "telling" was the noble thing to do.

Purple: Its ALWAYS good to be honest..and NEVER good to cheat :)

Andersp: No. It is BETTER than cheating and not telling. That concept is not rocket science.

Sumerian: Correct..i have no clue how it works...but if you really want to test it why dont you invite Trice to a 5 win game instead of testing it in a prize tourney?

Andersp: LMAO@Anders

Andersp: It seems to me that you have no idea how I am changing and improving the beta during a game, reacting on experiences. But that is indeed irrelevant. I would suggest to change your view on the opponent, see the engine instead of its operator / programmer, and notify its strictly limited use of persistant data. (It is a 48K engine only, no opening library, no table bases).

Purple: Conclusion..as long as you tell the world that you cheat it is ok..right Purple?

This is crazy. The man is honest and you condemn him. What is going to happen now when the next honest man thinks about stepping forward? All you are doing is pushing it into the closet because somehow that makes you more comfortable. I say wake up. And BTW I am used to being alone in my views. That doesn't change them.

Sumerian: As far as i know is Ed Trice the #1 rated in Gotic Chess. Do you (Smirf) win against him?

if the oponent actually knows this...
you keep saying the tourny runner knows..but thats diferent

Sumerian: Does it really matter if you or someone else created the engine? When you sit there and let the engine do the job..all you have to do is click a button (i guess) while your opponent has to "wrinkle his brain" for each move.
Doesnt seem fair to me.

to Andersp: If you have written your own engine, proof that fact, and make its usage transparent - where should be the problem, when only playing when being invited (where the opponent has seen your profile page) or after asking him, whether he would like to play against an engine.
to BrainKing04: Smirf is not an outside program. It is my own intellectual property. And if you are convinced that I should be banned from here, you have to initiate the appropriate steps.

Game Guidelines:

1. NO CHEATING. This includes using outside programs to help play and losing on purpose for the goal of boosting ratings. Your account may be banned, and ratings will be removed.

Sumerian: But you must see my point?..If Fencer approves your engine he has to say 'OK" to mine too...if was smart enough to create one :)

Andersp: well it is not at all fun, that those who frankly give information on using self written engines will be accused here, whereas a remote using of foreign programs is no theme at all. The problem seems to be that the truth is destructing some illusions, but I cannot change reality by denying it.

Sumerian: If im not wrong you (Smirf) have already won $25. Im no chessplayer so i dont suffer
but if an engine is allowed in one tourney i guess Fencer has to allow them in other games too...is that fun?

Andersp: Smirf will have big difficulties to be victorious there, on what I am in doubt. Moreover it has not been me who initially asked to participate. Instead the tournament creator repeatedly encouraged me to participate, explicitly allowing the use of Smirf. It seems to be of a special interest for him to watch it play there, which I of course can understand. I think it is the genuine right of a tournament's creator to decide who should be accepted as a participant in such an event.

Sumerian: Of course you should test your "product" but to test it in a prizetourney..hmmmm?...well enjoy the money :)

Andersp: everybody has the right to give his experiences an appropriate form. But there is a huge difference in using a self written engine or relying on the intellectual properties of others.

Cheaters only fool themselves...how can anyone think its fun to win and know he has cheated?..The defense "He has created the programme himself" is not so smart imo(apologizes to you who said it) A "robot" is a robot doesnt matter if Bill Gates/Ed Trice or whoever created it. If this "robot" is allowed then i think Fencer has a problem..then any kind of cheating must be allowed..right?

Immortality is important too, but we can't achieve it. So we should not care ot think about it..........

Same here: as nobody can't prove or prevent cheating, it's not important.........