Well put, M. Dumas.

i reckon chessnetwork is a computer: 3100?????

wth?  too unbelievable to be a human...lol

I think it's unfair to imply that a high % record indicates cheating. I am new to online chess (Nov 08) and like everyone else have started on a rating of 1200. Now I know that I'm not a bad player but have no idea of where I will fit in where ratings go but so far I have won my first 13 games, obviously giving me a 100% record. Without question, in time, I will reach the suitable rating level that reflects my playing strength and the losses & draws will come.

I just want those that think a high % record equals cheating to be patient before jumping to any conclusions. The fact is, if a person cheats on this site then they are only cheating themselves - of their own integrity & dignity. 

I have every reason to believe ChessNetwork with his 3100 Quick rating is not a cheater.

I think he went from about 2100 to 3100 by winning 1,000+ games at 1 0 from weak players, gaining 1 point per win, and losing at most 15 points per loss.

I think any strong player can do the same, if they have the discipline to not play other strong players.

When I played all comers at 1 0 or 1 1, my rating ranged between 1900 and 2100. Now that I have started playing only 1500-or-less players at 1 0, my rating has climbed to 2245, with every indication of climbing higher.

Im about to whip someone with a 1800+ rating and he has already accused me of cheating.

In reality my rating should be around 1500+ but i lost a bunch of games cause I let them time out and now im 1000+... also hes played a really weak game.... i have no idea how he has gotten to 1800+... i think perhaps hes a cheat.

I for one don't understand this fascination with cheating. I lose my games fair and square....it's a good way to help me learn.

It's all about ego and having an obsession with a rating.  Ratings mean nothing to me because of things raised such as cheating and the concept of post #25.

Is someone who completely dodges all players >1100 a good player -- even though they might have some number at like 1800 or something?

I would call them a phony, a bunny and a coward.  However, they, with their 1800 rating gets all high and inflated ego because they think they have acheived something, even though all they have acheived is made a number on a computer screen a lie.

Much the same for cheating.

The only way the rating system can have any meaning is if it is ignored and cheating is removed from the game.  This is why I like clubs so much... rare as they are now.  No-one in a club environment can cheat.  Matches are set up based on rating... no 1800 member is going to be matched up to anyone lower then like 1600.  It all works beautifully in a club environment.  Online, it looks the same, but the numbers are meaningless.

Don't get me wrong, I love to see my rating climb, but only if it is the result of me; not my cheating method or my abilities to 'hack' the system by dodging anyone who might beat me.

We are playing in this forum as it has a flexible time option and we are able to play with varied talents from different parts of the globe. If a guy is going to cheat here, i am sure he will cheat in every aspect of his day to day dealings. Why bother about such specimens? Let us enjoy our games with genuine chess lovers (which most of the members are) and remember that " Computers help idiots make their blunders faster"

You were playing very mechanical-like moves, but your goose-egg says otherwise

On this site, I have such a hard time switching pieces on the board when my player isn't looking... It's hard to cheat...

 If it's just for fun what's the problem let them cheat all they want, just make sure you beat them LOL. Or are you all worried that your ratings will drop or your win % will fall, as long as your true to the game of chess who cares what they do.Just enjoy the experince this great web site gives us.As for me I'm happy just to play chess don't care who or what.

I would say that as long as someone "cheats" consistently and their rating is acurate to the mechanism that they are using to "cheat" then what does it matter?  You are looking to play someone at that rating anyways.

Now if my wife were cheating and her performance suddenly improved because of it...

omg..this must be the hunredth time this topic has come up here.. just give it a rest guys, Eric and his crew are doing their best to throw the culprits out. It is pointless to bicker on and on about why they do it etc etc etc....  

Ratings aren't entirely meaningless on this website because they help people to find opponents whose skill levels are roughly equivalent to their own.  I have to ask, however, whether or not cheating matters because if your opponent is cheating well enough to beat you easily, then he's probably cheating in his other games, and his rating should be enough higher than yours that you know to expect a tough game.  If, on the other hand, his rating is close to yours, then the strength of his moves may be roughly equivalent to yours and you have a good game of chess whether or not he's cheating.  That being said, ratings matter for seeding purposes in tournaments.  For example, I advanced to Rd. 3 of the 1st chess.com tournament as three of my opponents timed out and the fourth opponent and I went 1-1, so we both advance.  Now I have to play a few games while the rest of Rd. 2 is finishing in order to increase my rating (which fell from a slightly timeout-inflated 1590 to 1440 due to a series of two losses) so that I can get a higher seeding in the round 3 pairings.  By the way, I don't think either of my current opponents are cheating, because I don't have inferior positions.  Also, has anyone noticed that computer engines are not as fun to play against as real people, or is it just my personal preference?  I've played against the Chess Titans game that comes with Vista, and it's the only chess-playing program that I've ever actually had fun playing against.  Other than that, they all seem rather boring.

OTB ratings don't matter either.

Send them a paradoxical riddle. Apparently computers hate 'em.

Not to mention, who's to say a player's much more intelligent and analytical Calculus Professor doesn't play a game or two under the player's name or something like that? You have to take online ratings with a grain of salt.

And that's exactly what it comes down to. I view online chess as a learning community. Personally, I'm not an incredibly strong chess player. However, I pay attention to the moves other players make when they beat me. It's a great way to learn...

Plus, when you're playing agianst live players, you can ask them why they made a certain move after the game is over. Try asking a chess computer to explain its "logic" after the game!