Aggressive Response to 4...Nf6 in the Scotch

It was also against the law in iraq to say Saddam Hussein was in the wrong. It really worked out good for those people to keep their mouths shut...

yeah and then america came in and shut him up.

you can't do it in a public forum.

no chess.com has thier methods.

also where did I do political debate. All I did was state facts. America went into Iraq. Captured Hussien. Handed him over to the Iraqis who were American supporters, and they executed him.

Are you saying I engine too, please tell me which game, and I will analyze my moves vs my engine like I did with the sample game shown to gavinator. I can prove my innocence, and you guys can only give ratings.

The only purpose of that was nationalism, which IMO hardly applies to America anymore.

I am with shepi on this one except its 8 our of 25 or arround 32% which might cause alert, but any 1300 could see those tactics.

No, the first three moves were given in the tournament. And most 1700s would see that Qd6 or Bh3 win positionally, I just wasn't paying attetion, and I definately wasn't engining. 32% when one is allowed opening databases is actually a quite small number as well.

Also, that analysis of that game took thirty minutes at least, just to write down my moves and what the engine suggested, without any actual analysis or any improvement in my chess. I am sick of you idiot garbage players accusing me of cheating, wasting my time, and making me look bad.

Also, haven't you noticed that most people on this site have higher correspondance ratings than blitz. If you haven't, look again.

That's probably because chess.com doesn't do anything about the people who engine...

The more players that engine the lower the ratings are. It's harder for players to get high ratings in standard because at that time control everyone they're playing is engining. YERESLOV, YOU BETTER NAME THE GAME YOU REFERENCED OR DELETE THAT COMMENT

.

If anyone claims I cheated again, I will report them. Please back up your claims with evidence, not, "oh, I looked at this game, and I think he might have used an engine." Or "He engines because in CC everyone engines". This seems to be how Yereslov and Gavinator support their arguments.

If you suspect someone, please use the top corner Help link. When that page opens, click on the left side option where it says Contact Us and submit a 'Suspected Cheat' ticket.

Also see this page

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/chesscom-policy-on-cheating

We provide tools to report cheating to our staff. But having several constant and redundant threads on the topic that circulate with the same questions and comments over and over again isn't helpful, and instead causes people to worry more than they need to. If you want to discuss cheating, please do it in this group

http://www.chess.com/groups/home/cheating-forum