Chesspedia, The Free Chess Encyclopedia

Correspondence chess

Correspondence chess is chess played by some sort of long-distance correspondence, usually through a Correspondence Chess Server or e-mail or the postal system. Less usual methods which have been employed include fax and homing pigeon. It is opposed to so-called over-the-board (OTB) chess, where the players are sat at a chessboard at the same time.

Correspondence chess allows people or clubs geographically distant to play one another without meeting in person. The length of a game played by correspondence can vary depending on the method used to transmit the moves - a game played via server or by e-mail might last no more than a few weeks or months, but a game played by post between players in different countries might last several years.

Correspondence chess differs from over-the-board play in several respects. While in OTB chess only one game is played at a time (the exception being in a simultaneous exhibition), in correspondence chess several games are usually played at once. All games in a tournament are played concurrently, and some players may have more than a hundred games continuing at the same time.

The time limits in correspondence play are usually between 30 and 60 days for every 10 moves. This allows for far deeper calculation, meaning that blunders are very rare. The use of any kind of assistance including chess databases and chess programs is allowed, although many hobby players voluntarily do without them. Due to computer assistance the essence of correspondence chess has changed and beside profound chess knowledge and analytical discipline the ability to interpret and guide computer analysis becomes important. Due to the fact that anybody with a computer can use the strongest programs to analyze his games the gap between the top level and beginner level has narrowed since a beginner can to a certain degree compensate his poor chess knowledge with long computer analysis. However the influence of computer assistance is controversially discussed and some argue that a chess program if left alone is no match for a top-level correspondence player. There is an interesting match between a correspondence chess grandmaster and six computer programs underway (Arno Nickel vs. Engines).

Contents

"Official" versus "Casual" chess

There are two main branches of correspondence chess emerging in the World today. With certain player's interpretation of the game of "chess", as having the implication of intellectual rigour and playing ones' own moves, this assumption has been seriously challenged in recent years with advancing engine techology, and has arguably splintered the correspondence chess world into two separate and distinct entities.

It is even immediately apparent from the wording in just the section above where someone has indicated "Due to the fact that anybody with a computer can use the strongest programs to analyze his games the gap between the top level and beginner level has narrowed since a beginner can to a certain degree compensate his poor chess knowledge with long computer analysis" that they are definitely a pro-ICCF correspondence player who seems to see nothing wrong with promoting engine use into the field of "correspondence chess". "Casual" correspondence chess players would most certainly be "outraged" by such comments, and expect their opponents to use their own brain to generate their moves, especially when outside of the opening phase of the game.

The two distinct "branches" of correspondence chess are the following :

"Official" (as in ICCF) correspondence chess

"Official" correspondence chess is that related to the ICCF which is affiliated with FIDE. Up until 2004, ICCF correspondence chess was played only via E-mail and postal mail. For these two forms of transmission, the ICCF developed their own game notation called the ICCF Numeric notation has been developed especially for the purpose of ICCF correspondence chess.

Controversially, while claiming to be under the FIDE rules of chess, the increasing emergence of powerful chess move generating "engines" which assists players making moves, seems to contradict a fundamental Fide OTB law of chess regarding external assistance. However, it is pointless having "rules" which are not able to be enforced, and so it is perhaps a wise decision by the ICCF not to have any rules prohibiting the use of chess engines. It is possible for a player within the same game to use a variety of engines as well as their own moves, making the process of providing proof for engine impossible, unless they player actually admitted such use.

However, the ICCF does fly in the face of several other correspondence chess organisations such as the USCF correspondence chess, CCLA, IECC. An article discussing engine use can be found here:-

http://www.correspondencechess.com/campbell/articles/a050531.htm

Whilst the use of passive reference books for Openings has been accepted in the spirit of traditional correspondence chess, the power of modern analytical engines, means that entire games could be potentially being played by an engine, and not the player themselves. Such players who have a near total reliance on engines can be viewed as "operators" and may not even be chess players themselves.

Within "official" correspondence chess, there is usually a clear requirement to pay per event, and use one's real name.

The international governing body of "official" correspondence chess is the International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF) which organises postal and e-mail events. There are numerous national and regional bodies for postal chess, as well as a number of organisations devoted to organising e-mail play (such as the International Email Chess Group (IECG) and International E-mail Chess Club (IECC)). However it should be noted that the IECG and IECC are not "official" in the slightest way.

The ICCF awards the titles International Master, Senior International Master and Grandmaster - these are equivalent to similar titles awarded by FIDE for over-the-board chess. The ICCF also runs the World Correspondence Chess Championships. Because these events can last a long time, they may overlap: for instance, in February 2005 Joop van Oosterom was declared winner of the 18th Championship (which began in June 2003), though the winner of the 17th Championship (which began in March 2002) had not yet been determined.

It is a great shame for the promotion of correspondence chess generally, that the ICCF views casual correspondence chess servers explicitly as "competitors" rather than promoting this form of the game. This is explicitly made clear in the 2004 Official minutes of the ICCF.

From the president's address to the 2004 ICCF Congress (Mumbai, India) - http://correspondencechess.com/congress/

"The ICCF President stressed that, although ICCF was the only international correspondence chess organisation whose titles were universally recognised, and also acknowledged by FIDE, it must not underestimate competition and it needed to be ready to accept the challenge. ICCF must continually monitor overall developments, be flexible and react quickly and ICCF and National Federations must provide good service to all CC players, otherwise they could lose them to competitor organisations. "

"Casual" correspondence chess

Make no mistake, there are plenty of "serious" players researching for days and weeks their moves on "casual" correspondence servers. The emergence of "Casual" correspondence chess has arguably taken correspondence chess out of the doldrums of the elite few players, prepared to play via snail-post or Email and be forced to used "numeric notation" to write each move, and into the mainstream of Internet chess "for the masses".

It can be argued in fact that online correspondence chess via webservers is the fastest growth area of correspondence chess, and also a growth area faster than online blitz chess. There is no requirement to use numeric notation to write one's moves. Moves are simply entered via an intuitive chess board interface. Casual correspondence chess servers have actually been the main driving innovator of the ICCF, because up until 2004, the ICCF did not even have their own correspondence chess server, and only offered snail-mail and Email forms of correspondence chess. Correspondence chess servers such as Itsyourturn.com, playchess.de, redhotpawn.com, letsplaychess.com, gameknot.com, schemingmind.com, have been around for several years. The grand-daddy being itsyorturn.com closely followed by playchess.de. However pre-dating itsyourturn.com, the Internet chess club has enabled correspondence chess via a move and store method. Predating the rise of the Internet, it should also be noted that Compuserve was a very strong "online" platform for chess players which supported correspondence chess.

"Casual" correspondence chess is "chess for the masses". There is no requirement at all to use one's real name when playing on a casual correspondence chess server. The use of "nicknames" is predominant. The fee for casual CC servers is usually just a simple yearly fee where you can play in as many tournaments or events as you want. The use of chess engines is usually extremely discouraged or against the terms and conditions of casual cc servers. The idea is that people use their own brain and play mainly for fun, and not aim necessarily for a "perfect" game using all available resources. Additionally because there is no "official" rating or prize-fund at stake, the motivation for using engines makes the honour system a more effective proposal in the context of "casual" correspondence chess. Therefore you will not find explicit adverts for Chessbase or other engine suppliers. The idea is to use your own brain and enjoy the game for its own sake - not the accumulation of "official ratings", or prizes. Indeed most casual correspondence chess servers steer well away from offering cash prize-funds as this is seen as a major incentive for players to "cheat" by making use of chess engines.

Over the board players who also play correspondence chess

Although nowadays the strongest correspondence players are specialists, a number of notable players in over-the-board (OTB) chess have in the past played postal games during their chess career. Paul Keres, an Estonian sometimes regarded as the strongest player never to become world champion, played many games of correspondence chess, apparently because he had difficulty finding players in his native country anywhere near strong enough to give him a decent game. Alexander Alekhine and Max Euwe also played. The modern GM Ulf Andersson also achieved very high ratings in both ICCF and Fide. The two times British champion George Botterill is now a high rated correspondence chess player.

Also, there has been a recent trend of strong OTB players choosing to play in correspondence chess, either in part or whole. Many players who were in the world-class area in their younger years find that they do not have the time nor inclination due to family or careers to compete in OTB chess but still enjoy playing chess. Ulf Andersson of Sweden is the most notable of these, due to his high OTB rating to have joined the ranks of correspondence chess after an illustrious career in the world-class OTB arena.

ICCF World Champions

Dates given are the period in which the final of the championship took place, as given on the ICCF website.

Men

  1. Cecil John Seddon Purdy (1950-53)
  2. Viacheslav Ragozin (1956-59)
  3. Albéric O'Kelly de Galway (1959-62)
  4. Vladimir Zagorovsky (1962-65)
  5. Hans Berliner (1965-68)
  6. Horst Rittner (1968-71)
  7. Yakov Estrin (1972-76)
  8. Jorn Sloth (1975-80)
  9. Tonu Oim (1977-83)
  10. Victor Palciauskas (1978-84)
  11. Friedrich Baumbach (1983-89)
  12. Grigory Sanakoev (1984-91)
  13. Mikhail Umansky (1989-98)
  14. Tonu Oim (1994-2000)
  15. Gert Jan Timmerman (1996-2002)
  16. Tunc Hamarat (1999-2004)
  17. not yet determined
  18. Joop van Oosterom (2003-)

Women

  1. Olga Rubtsova (1968-72)
  2. Lora Jakovleva (1972-77)
  3. Ljuba Kristol (1978-84)
  4. Lyudmila Belavenets (1984-92)
  5. Ljuba Kristol (1993-98)

External links