Is analysing moves on separate board in correspondence chess ethical? In Lichess, any form of external help (e.g. engines) is forbidden, even in correspondence chess. However, there is an option to open a separate board where one can make unlimited scratch moves.
I would regard using a separate board as cheating because building
variations in the player's mind is in the spirit of chess and is subject to failures. For example, overlooking a piece that refutes an attack could be eliminated by using a separate board, so while using it will undoubtedly hinder a player's personal improvement, not using it will place him in disadvantage over another player who does.
Assuming external help is forbidden, is it ethical to use a scratch board in correspondence chess? Am I wrong that it goes against the spirit of chess?
Your question is a bit paradox: analyzing is the whole point of correspondence chess (and since strong engines exist, it is sort of a zombie). It is very unfortunate (and not your fault) that Lichess called it that way in the first place: e.g. ICCF explicitely allows engines. Better would be calling it &quot;very long time chess&quot;. Consequently, you may analyze per hand. Of course, you again must distinguish from, how shall I call it, postal chess - a friendly game between strangers just for the sake that it's possible (today much faster and easier, of course), and you tacitly agree not to analyze.