Maybe it was more of a chortle.
Free Chess Engine recommendation?
Sort:
cbets, stop lying. Stockfish does not interface with chess.com (or any other chess site) and move for you. Of course there could be a third-party program that does this, but Stockfish does not have this function. Stop besmirching the Stockfish developers.
As has been pointed out there are many legitimate uses for using chess engines.
Anyone using an engine to cheat should soon have a rating that is suspiciously high, because modern engines are more powerful than any human player. This is why I disbelieve your claims. Show some real proof for your claims or shut up.
cbetz71 írta:
burke3gd wrote:
cbets, stop lying. Stockfish does not interface with chess.com (or any other chess site) and move for you. Of course there could be a third-party program that does this, but Stockfish does not have this function. Stop besmirching the Stockfish developers.
As has been pointed out there are many legitimate uses for using chess engines.
Anyone using an engine to cheat should soon have a rating that is suspiciously high, because modern engines are more powerful than any human player. This is why I disbelieve your claims. Show some real proof for your claims or shut up.
i never claimed it did.learn to read more than 3 words at a time and youll see i stated that i didnt know if any mentioned here did. someone else said stockfish,so i took them at their word. GnrfFrtzl as for the insult,i only returned the volley. your attempt at insulting me,or my credibility, is the cause...
Mate, funny you're saying that we should learn to read more than 3 words when you're the one completely misunderstanding for examply, my intention.
Sure, some don't have a particular sense of humour to realise when a comment is snarky or sarcastic, I can get that.
So I'm telling you again, I didn't want to insult you in any way.
You came here kicking down the door calling anyone cheaters an s-bags.
After telling you the actual uses of engines (which you yourself asked), you kept going regardless.
Then, you talked about how you meet cheaters (4-5 in a row in your words), but you've nothing to show.
Then you're trying to call me one without even bothering to actually look at my games which are obviously of someone who never cheats.
Then you go about still insulting others.
Isn't this what is, simply put, talking sh*t?
Sure I'm doubting your credibility, because you still have not shown any of the games you were referring to. So why do you even think you have any kind of credibility, at all?
cbetz71 írta:
how does one prove cheating? lol...and as for your put up or shut up comment, i reply or what? ill shut up when im good and ready,not before. back to reality. can i post a video here? if so,ill gladly show proof of cheating. that would be the only way. analysing moves and saying one was wrong or this was missed does nothing.the bigger picture is what matters. some of those "misses" are intentional. its funny how you guy pick and choose what to respond to. my questions regarding instant moves has yet to be answered. the best answer ive heard elsewhere is pre moves,but that doesnt explain the perfect string 15+moves out...
Show the games you say you had your opponent cheating.
Then anyone with any kind of an engine can tell you if that was really cheating or not, after running a simple, quick analysis on it.
About the string of moves.
That really depends on who you play. I've had people that played like that, they've played the same openings a gajillion times and play it this way.
If it was 'only' 15 moves, it wasn't cheating.
Or did they turn off the program halfway through the game?
Glad to see we both took back a touch.
You can post games here by first opening said game, copying either the FEN code or the PGN (it will be on the right side when opening a finished game), then, when making a comment on a thread, you can click on the chessboard icon that say 'Insert position or game', and follow the appearing instructions.
Then we can once and for all actually figure it if your opponents were actually cheating or not.
Mar 25, 2015
0
#67
cbetz71 wrote:
Spiritbro77 wrote:
I've never heard of an engine that can move FOR you either.... Engines don't work by themselves. They need a GUI. And no program I've ever heard of can make moves for you here on Chess.com or any other online site.
this is false,and you know it. chessbudy(google it) for instance definitely moved for you on yahoos chess site. as did playbuddy. actually,playbuddy is still around since yahoo chess closed because there are different versions of it that play all the pogo games for you. i didnt download any of the software mentioned above,so i cant say for sure that it moves for you,but at least 2 of them advertise such,or at least imply such. bottom line,if playbuddy can sync with yahoo chess,then other software can do the same here. how its done,i have no clue.im not a program creator. what i do know,for fact,is making instant moves without some type of assistance is impossible. pre moves would be the only legit way to accomplish this,and even then you would have to be a special type of grandmaster to string along 15+ perfectly played assumtions of what your opponents next string of moves will be. i play only 10 minute games. so when i play someone who has moved 15+times in under 10 seconds(while destroying me by the way),should i assume they are some type of grandmaster savant? now when i play 4 or 5 games in a row like that,am i just unlucky enough to have faced the 5 greatest players on the planet? add to that their ratings are never above 1700 and i think its safe to say the answer to both questions is no. therefor,the only logical explanation is cheating. am i wrong for seeing it this way? actually,no need to answer. that was a rhetorical question...
No, I don't "know it". I have a number of chess programs. I have Fritz 13, Arena, Chess Hero, Chess Pad, Chess Base Reader, Lucas Chess and Babas Chess. I have a number of engines that work within these programs. NONE of which can make a move FOR you here or elsewhere online. That's not saying one can't cheat using them if that is the goal. But no, I PERSONALLY have never heard of or seen an automatic program that would log on and make your move for you. Probably because I have no interest in one if it exists. I play chess to better my game. Cheating detracts from one's game, it doesn't improve it. So cheating is stupid to me. It doesn't interest me in the slightest. If someone else wants to cheat.... that's on them. Doesn't bother me that much. I lose a game, I learn from it. I hold no ego in the matter....
I think Chess.com does an admirable job of trying to weed out the cheaters. And if some slip by, then it's to their own detriment. They aren't learning anything. They aren't winning anything. There's no money or honor at stake. They are fools that get a thrill from cheating. Nothing more.
I have no idea if your opponents were cheating or just very fast players. But if you feel they were cheating, turn in a card and the mods will check it out for you....
Accusing everyone of cheating that uses an engine is pretty much accusing every player. I would find it hard to believe a serious chess player, intent on improvement, would forgo such a useful tool in this day and age. First thing I do once a game is over is use this sites analysis tool to check where I made mistakes. Or more accurately, where the engine feels I did. Often I disagree with Chess.coms computer assesment. But it IS very useful and you can learn a lot from it.
The truth is that if you don't use an engine to analyse your games then accusing your opponents of cheating is idiotic.
cbetz71 wrote:
again,i am obviously not as smart as the rest of you. i wouldnt even know how to analyse my game,let alone know how to tell from that analysing if my opponent was real or not. what i do know,for fact,is that making a move in less than a split second is impossible. stringing 15+ perfect error free moves together in less than a split second each is also impossible unless you set premoves and even then,the error free part makes it extremely unlikely. these are facts,not opinions.
1. No it is not impossible.
2. What is impossible is for an amateur player to determine that their opponents play was "perfect" without engine checking their moves.
You would learn alot from doing some engine analysis yourself. It shows you pretty quickly just how many errors lower level players make especially in fast games.
What about those that comes with Arena?
cbetz71 wrote:
unless you are willing to sit in front of me,my laptop against yours(or your pc,phone,or any other device you use),to prove me wrong,please stop defending what most reasonable people believe to be impossible.
Why is it that you're the only "reasonable person" in this thread. It's quite simple really, you can't claim that your opponent played 15+ perfect moves if you haven't engine checked those moves. Do some engine analysis and you'll start to realise just how many errors games between amateurs involve. Saying that we're amateurs is not an insult, simply a fact.
Also I'm not saying this kind of cheating doesn't happen, but I'm very skeptical of claims that it is widespread at sub-2000 level. The quality of play simply isn't high enough to suggest engine use generally speaking.
As someone who does analyse my games with engines I can say that I have almost never encountered someone whose play suggested that they were cheating - like maybe one or two times.
cbetz71 wrote:
furthermore,i asked if i can post a video here.not a link to a game,an actual video.that would be how i could prove my point. next time i play someone i suspect of heating,i can take a video of the instant moves to show you. im assuming based on the lack of answers that this would not be possible? if thats the case,im not sure i see a point of discussing the laws of physics any further...
Ok firstly its extremely easy to move that quickly online. OTB not so much. If the quality of moves is what's raising suspicion post links to games and myself and others can engine check them. However you should not be claiming that someone is cheating until you have checked the moves.
Mar 25, 2015
0
#74
If you're so sure they were cheating, turn in a card. The mods will sort it out. In the meantime, try playing online chess or something. Peace
cbetz71 wrote:
Thomas2792796 wrote:
cbetz71 wrote:
furthermore,i asked if i can post a video here.not a link to a game,an actual video.that would be how i could prove my point. next time i play someone i suspect of heating,i can take a video of the instant moves to show you. im assuming based on the lack of answers that this would not be possible? if thats the case,im not sure i see a point of discussing the laws of physics any further...
Ok firstly its extremely easy to move that quickly online. OTB not so much. If the quality of moves is what's raising suspicion post links to games and myself and others can engine check them. However you should not be claiming that someone is cheating until you have checked the moves.
you are a moron if you actually believe what you just said. im done with this discussion unless there is something of value added.
Not sure what part of my post you're referring to. What I said was...
1. Making 15 moves in 6 secs in not difficult.
2. If you are suspicious of cheating because of move quality you should engine check your opponents moves or have some else do it.
Several people have offerred to check your games to see if your opponents were cheating. I am also making that offer. Just link us to the games.
15 moves in 6 seconds is impossible. I've been watching u guys duke it out it's been quite amusing lol and while I don't agree with how cbetz went about it initially, if he's tellin the truth about that then that's not human IMO.
cbetz71 wrote:
i am not talking about analyzing games to see if i was cheated. im talking about only the instant moves.i dont need analyzing to know im being cheated when science dictates that fact for me. im only arguing your assumtion that the laws of physics somehow become irrelivant on chess.com. according to you,moving 15 times without assistance in under 6 seconds is not difficult. your words,not mine. unfortunately for you,you are wrong.this is not a case of we agree to disagree. this is very simple. you sir are just wrong.period.
The fact that you're sticking to this line even though you know what premove is is kinda hilarious. On this site you can make 15 moves in 1.5 secs if my calculations are correct. Anything faster than that is impossible.
cbetz71 wrote:
how does one prove cheating? lol...and as for your put up or shut up comment, i reply or what? ill shut up when im good and ready
And nothing, I'm not trying to threaten you. I was just hoping you would realize you are in the wrong and stop posting in this thread. Which you've taken completely off-topic btw.
A multitude of people have tried to explain to you how you are mistaken and asked for you to show some kind of evidence to back up your claims. But instead you just keep going around in circles, being extremely rude to people and making wild accusations without any evidence whatsoever.
And, yes you can post links to videos and even better would be to just to post links to the games you are referring to, they are all logged on the site after all. But the best thing of all would be for you to admit that you were completely out of line and just leave the thread. But back to reality, that's not going to happen is it?
By free chess engine do you mean Stockfish?
Mar 26, 2015
0
#80
cbetz71,
Particularly in endings, such as pawn races and elementary checkmates, I've often averaged one-half second per move. That's in recent years. When I was in my early 40s quite a few years ago, I played a few one minute games on ICC that went more than 100 moves.
Hikaru Nakamura beat a computer a few years ago on ICC, as I recall, in a three minute game that lasted close to 350 moves.
It is humanly possible to move very fast.
There's a poser dogging me on another thread who has had multiple 1 0 games close to 100 moves. His play does not resemble a computer, but has many quick, shuffle moves that are obvious premoves. His bullet rating is 2200+.
If you want others to share your suspicions, you need to be much more specific.
cbetz made me giggle.