Recently I just had a player challenge me out of the blue.

I was fairly shocked when I saw that his rating was 2057 and immediately thought 1) Why is this person challenging me?
2) I'm toast.

Upon clicking on his account, I saw that he was currently playing about 18 games, all against players with rating 1300 and under. Looking at his stats, his highest win was against a 1600 player, and inspecting his past games, he had lost to several 1300-1400s. He doesn't even know the main line of the sicilian (even to 3 moves!)

I feel it is safe to assume that he is exclusively playing low-rated players to boost his rating. What I ask is, is this legal (on Chess.com)? The result of the game still has to be determined.

Note: His username is not disclosed for obvious reasons and for the possibility that I am somehow mistaken.

Completely legal

Thanks.

Maybe not so honorable, but yea, probably legal lol.

Found the game and looked at yr opponent's profile. Its a strange old world! He certainly doesnt appear to be a cheat or anything, just has a dubious set of values. Good luck! 

As he plays more games and "solidifies" his rating he will only gain 1 point for a win against a 1400, and eventually 0 points!

The best part is when some up and coming 1400 who just joined the site gets a game against some overrated patzer like that :P. ... Ahh, chess is just :P.

Low self esteem issues

You can play all the weakr players you want, if that soothes your ego, but you will not improve your game that way. Obviously he has a high rating which means absolutely nothing, so he's only fooling himself.

Looking at this realistically you're probably right. But - it is an important skill, to be able to "win the games you're supposed to win". If you are always playing people at or above your rating level, you never get to work on this.

It's harder than you think -- look at it from the GM's level. They are supposed to win basically every game they play, against FMs and lower, and win a bunch against IMs as well. They're constantly paired down, and have to win. Playing in this manner does give value, and would be a good thing for some players to work on.

It's legal, yet I find opponents like this to be cowards. Just destroy him in your game and ruin his 'boosted' self-esteem :)

totally legal 

here kitty kitty.

winning percentage = 99%     best win = -400 lower     average opposition = -1000 lower

he dropped 200 points just by that single loss to a 1300

Since it's all relative, I would simply argue that if you are a 1600 player then it's valuable to know how to beat 1200's all the time. Same thing for 2200/1800 and 2600/2200.

That's what ratings are all about, after all. They're relative.

By the way tornadofdoom, even his "best win" against the 1600 player was won on time. He was actually losing very badly.

 Couldn't have said it better myself... So I won't even try.

I was looking at open seeks the other day and came across a guy rated over 2000 who I thought might be worth playing. However, when I looked at the game setup I would have to play black and I'd have to play the black side of the Damiano Defence, which is a win for black in only 12.5% of games according to Game Explorer. He was playing quite a few games with this setup. Getting a high rating playing only lower-rated players is one thing, but doing it by handicapping your opponents really is beyond the pale.

Good grief... he might as well just start his opponents down a piece.

There is no honour in nowdays chess...

I'm curious as to why you think a 2000 chess.com rating means that this person should know the 'main line' of the Sicilian Defence, even to 3 moves? What do you consider the main line? Also, perhaps your opponent shall play by opening principle? Not in this case, but not all 2000 players are booked up.