@ hicenunc,

Well that's reassuring, not that I'm gonna be on a GM-level soon!

@ AOC,

I think I see what you mean. The best reply I can give is that most openings are associated with known specific mainlines and tabiyas (tabiyae? tabiyii?). So ethics might dictate that if you're playing multiple games at once and using computer-assisted prep, then only use a given opening variation once at any given time. So, you have to finish your Ruy Lopez Chigorin before you begin it in another game but you can always play the Breyer instead - as Black. But if White, then no more Ruy Lopez until you're done! 

Actually your question and the way you phrased it reminded me of an ethical and practical issue with correspondence chess and engines that has long puzzled me. This only applies to correspondence chess where engines are not allowed: USCF correspondence play, chess.com turn-based play, maybe others.

As an OTB player, there is a clear separation between "when I am playing" and "when I am preparing". But as a correspondence player, practically speaking there may be no time when I am "not playing". Now if I am playing exactly one correspondence game, then it should be obvious I can't use an engine to analyze an opening that is on the board. Later in the game, say in the endgame, then it should be okay to analyze the opening, preparing for my next outing with that opening.

But what if I am playing multiple events with different start times? Some of them will be in the opening, and others will be in the endgame, and as a busy player it may be there is never a time when I am allowed to analyze a popular / my favorite opening. How do correspondence players handle this scenario? It seems to me that ethically it unavoidably becomes a fine judgment call. Which as we know humans are not very good at.

Cathexis [/quote]
cathexis wrote on 06/06/21 at 12:57:16:


If you want to train with a friend, you should play unrated. As far as I know, unrated games are not monitored for cheating.

You'll never be flagged for cheating for a single perfect game (unless they detect some kind of known cheating software connecting with their website).

In general, you'll never be flagged for cheating if you're playing well or even exceptionnaly well. Just think of it this way : if you're wrongly banned for cheating, then you can go collect an IM title OTB with no difficulty (so go get your title as a consolation) 

A GM who would log as an anonymous player would get flagged for cheating. I think it happened to Gormally and they reversed the ban when he told them who he was.