I'm not saying the person's name since I'm not 100% sure. But the timing of the moves makes plenty of sense, and it never made the slightest blunder. I've played many players of different ratings, and I've played a computer many times, and this definitely feels like a master strength computer.
Very instructional none the less. Sure was difficult to rid my position of the e5 pawn.
It 100% definitely wasn't a computer. I hope that helps.
I was about to criticize your accusation, but I found that game to be quite odd. I don't see many 1300-level players who switch from an aggressive (accepted) gambit opening to a methodical and conservative positional struggle. I won't say I agree with your assertion, but White's play does remind me of a computer's.
It clearly wasn't a computer :
4.e5 is a known opening error as after 4...g5 Black reaches a vastly superior version of a mainline Kings Gambit Accepted. Any computer would have had the correct move in its opening book as well as be able to calculate it easily.
17.Ng6+ threw away some of White's advantage (though he's still clearly winning) when other moves such as 17.Rxf6 were much faster.
Then he misses various much quicker mates such as 22.Rd1 mating in 2.
His play looked nothing like a computer to me.
I looked up your live games and found the game. Then, I looked up the opponent and his games. Turns out that he often plays 1. e4 2. f4. His strategy is usually the same- establishing a beachhead on e5. Looks like he's just used to this pattern.
I'm not saying the person's name since I'm not 100% sure. But the timing of the moves makes plenty of sense, and it never made the slightest blunder. I've played many players of different ratings, and I've played a computer many times, and this definitely feels like a master strength computer.
Very instructional none the less. Sure was difficult to rid my position of the e5 pawn.
Interesting.
I looked up your live games and found the game. Then, I looked up the opponent and his games. Turns out that he often plays 1. e4 2. f4. His strategy is usually the same- establishing a beachhead on e5. Looks like he's just used to this pattern.
Ooops! I forgot people can look up my live games. I tried to keep this anonymous so I'm not accused of slander. I just found it odd that every move was made the same number of seconds apart, including the first 3 moves, with the last moves being what were faster. I guess I stand corrected. Hopefully if my opponent sees this thread, it will be taken as a compliment. My opponent played a very solid positional game, at least as far as I could tell.
I did not realize I was sacrificing my knight when I captured on e5. I made a counting error. I do get e5 played on me often, so I will look into g5.
I looked up your live games and found the game. Then, I looked up the opponent and his games. Turns out that he often plays 1. e4 2. f4. His strategy is usually the same- establishing a beachhead on e5. Looks like he's just used to this pattern.
Ooops! I forgot people can look up my live games. I tried to keep this anonymous so I'm not accused of slander. I just found it odd that every move was made the same number of seconds apart, including the first 3 moves, with the last moves being what were faster. I guess I stand corrected. Hopefully if my opponent sees this thread, it will be taken as a compliment. My opponent played a very solid positional game, at least as far as I could tell.
I did not realize I was sacrificing my knight when I captured on e5. I made a counting error. I do get e5 played on me often, so I will look into g5.
As long as you didn't say it out loud and to others it couldn't be slander. Libel is written and slander is spoken. And the best defence against either is to make sure what you say or write is true.
in before the lock.
see here....
http://www.chess.com/groups/view/cheating-forum
and here....
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/chesscom-policy-on-cheating
Why would a computer want to play you kco? :)
I asked my opponent what program was used
Another sore loser. Yawn.
I mean live chess, not live chat.
I found it a bit suspicious that every single one of my opponents moves were about 15 seconds apart, from the first move until the almost the very end, when there was a mate in 4. Even then, there was a suspicious 3 second pause between moves obvious to a 1500 player but not to a 1300 player. Only the very last move as made suddenly, since my opponent probably did not need to ask the computer for help on that one. I don't mind getting smashed by a computer, though. I'll enjoy analyzing the game. I asked my opponent what program was used, and my opponent did not respond, but just logged off.
[The site's policy is to limit discussion about cheating to the Cheating Forum. http://www.chess.com/groups/view/cheating-forum. More information in the FAQ http://support.chess.com/Knowledgebase/Article/View/124/0/cheaters--cheating-what-you-need-to-know. If you think someone cheated, click on "Help & Support" at the bottom of the page, then on "Contact Support" and select the "Report Suspected Cheating" category. Moderator]