This is a serious question. The issue of cheating consumes a large part of the discussion on chess.com. I have had no experiences in which I thought someone was cheating. I've joined in numerous discussions where someone claimed he/she had been cheated that ended the same way: the "victim" withdrew his/her claim after numerous requests to post the game under suspicion.

My experience has thus been that false accusations of cheating are a bigger problem than cheating.

Can anyone point to incidents of cheating on this site?

Well, considering we arent supposed to point to incidents of cheating, then no. Needless to say, if you look up on the chess.com player list there are usually one or two players who have only played about 15 games and are about the top of the leaderboard.

They aren't there a few days later.

I totally agree - people are way too obsessed by this. I don't think it happens much.

But I have another reason for not worrying about it. My rating matters to me (I know some people don't worry about ratings) because I enjoy increasing my understanding of chess and believe that my rating is an indication as to whether I am making any progress or not. Ok, it's not a perfect indication but it is some sort of indication.

However, when I play against someone rated, say, 1800, why should I care whether it is a person playing legally (i.e. unaided by another human or chess engine) or a person using an engine or a group of people making the moves together after a chat? In essence, the entity I am playing is playing at the strength of 1800 and I can either beat that entity or not. The precise nature of the entity sitting on the other end the tinterweb somewhere half way across the world could be of lesser concern to me. If I discovered that chess.com was a hoax - that all the players were AI-endowed software engines designed with different personalities and playing strengths it wouldn't bother me one bit.

I completely agree with corum. I play against Fritz to learn so I would not care if I was playing against a dope who was using Fritz to play me.

An ironic thread topic.

corum, that's a nice candy coated view of cheating. It puts a smile on your face until you realize that someone might play straight against most people and only cheat occasionally. So now you're playing someone rated 1800, but they are cheating to a strength of 2700.

Honestly, I think that cheating happens far less often than it's suspected of happening. Heck, I've had someone tell me after a game they were sick of playing people's engines. That's not too subtle.

 No irony here. I posted this topic after seeing 3 of the 5 "recent forums" on the opening page had to do with "cheating." If all these topics were new, it would be a different issue. But the same discussions seem to happen over and over.

I don't think that one topic questioning the utility of hundreds is ironic.

While cheating is no laughing matter... I have to crack up at certain people I have talked to who won't play chess online because they feel like everyone they play is cheating. Then I play them (mind you I am NOTHING special at chess) and i realize how little they know about chess.

I'm not having a go at beginners.. whatever level you are at, you have a right to be upset if your opponent cheated. I just always remind myself it does not take a computer to beat me... and I find i'm much less suspicious of people like Loomis who wipe the board with my posterior.

There probably is a time to suspect cheating, and even report possible cheaters. I'm just saying that I think 95% of the players on this site probably aren't a very good judge of when an opponent is using computer help.

 Great point, well said.

I have been using the computer analysis feature quite a bit lately and it is incredibly illuminating to see how poorly I (and some of my much higher rated opponents) play. I'm sure there are times when either I or my opponent are making moves that would match Fritz's first choice 100% because it's simply exploiting the poor move that leaves your position a shambles. When I leave my queen and king forkable, the only question is whether you see it; not what would be the best move if you do.

I have been in 2 games where my oponents were banned for cheating. I did not suspect or accuse them of cheating, it just so happened that they were banned while I had games in progress with them. I'm glad the site catches at least some of the cheaters.

Totally agree with this topic!!!

Instead of enjoying the good and friendly atmosphere of this site to play a few games, some people are too paranoid about cheating...

Relax, get a beer, coffee, tea or whatever and enjoy! 

 Yes. I'm curious how frequently cheaters are caught and how confident the management are in their methods. To use a sports analogy inspired by your Sox, I'm curious how many people use banned substances and don't get caught. We've seen a lot who do get caught, and it would seem that there would be a problem only if there were a lot of players using and not getting caught. So long as they are getting nabbed and banned, everything is working fine.

If someone is cheating it would soon become evident when the game is analysed and there are no 'mistakes'.  

As a topic of discussion, c/heating  is fascinatingly irresistable because it engages us on so many different levels: psychologically, morally, intellectually, childishly, temptingly, technologically, puzzlingly, mysteriously, motivationally, self-analytically, ...

 Also, 100% win is a huge red flag (or 100% win/draw with no losses).  Not even Kasparov wins 100% of the time.

Wow. Shows what I know, it never even occurred to me to use a chess engine or game to tell me what to do. Where's the fun and satisfaction in that? I pretty much suck at chess but watching my mistakes and rare successes is where the fun is.