A Challenge To Cheater_1

FIrst off, I DONT EVER come to this forum and make posts....I stick with the general discussion. But since I get a topic named after me, I MUST respond. SECOND, I have been told in NO UNCERTAIN terms by ERIK that if I cheat on this site, IM DONE. GONE. BANNED. POOF. You all think Im stupid dont you? I will absolutely positively NOT cheat on this site. Im here solely to vent and rant and rave and make an otherwise drab site interesting. Besides, I LOVE CHESS!

Next to cheating, I have a talent for making people understand my points. I can debate with the best of them and win. I love analogies and frequently make them to drill my points into your thick heads. Listen up, I am being called out by a person who wants to battle me, program vs. program to see if Im really as good a cheater as I claim. I MAKE NO CLAIMS TO BE A CORRESPONDENCE CHESS CHEATER. I DESPISE correspondence chess. I LOATHE it. IT IS NOT REAL CHESS. It is no more real chess than is one minute chess. It is not my specialty. I have honed my skills to play ON THE FLY. Try to transpose moves from Fritz to the chess board with 20 seconds left and you got mate in 15. ITS A CHALLENGE. Correspondence chess is like running a 26 mile marathon one mile at a time with a weeks' rest inbetween each mile run. Calling me out to play a correspondence game is like calling TIGER WOODS out to play 18 holes at DISNEY WORLDS PIRATES COVE mini golf to see if he is really the best golfer in the world.

PRESENTLY, I am only open to playing 15 minute games--LIVE. You ever watch a GM play a 15 minute game? Well, first off, they hate it and rarely do it. But if you have ever seen one, they play very very poorly compared to their TRUE strength. And besides, there AINT a GM on the planet that can beat FRITZ or RYBKA or SHREDDER in a 15 game. Its never been done. I stack the odds in my favor. I trust I have made my point. I make the rules, see. Play by my rules or I'll take my chess board and pieces and program and go home. Buh Bye.

cheater_1, I CHALLENGE you to a GAME at DISNEY WORLDS PIRATES COVE mini golf! -- WHY, I wonder, DO you CAPITALIZE various WORDS as if ANYONE WILL CARE.  It is a DARN SHAME that this THREAD is still ALIVE.  You must NOTE that I make NO claims to be a GOOD PUTTER, and I DESPISE the ORANGE golf BALLS.  I believe I have staked my claim here.  Bring your best putter, and let's roll.  I will use the GREEN ball or I will take my Billy Baroo and go home.  Its your call now,  Brother.  See you at the Pirate Ship Check In DESK!  *I* WILL KEEP TRACK OF THE SCORECARD AND LITTLE PENCIL!!!!!!

First off, if you are caught cheating on this site, you should be banned, as should anyone else who is caught cheating. BUT, what Ih8sens proposed is NOT cheating. As I pointed out earlier, the rules on this site clearly state that if both players agree to the use of computers AND the game is unrated, it is allowed. I see nothing in the original proposal that would lead me to believe that he was looking for a rated game, and it's obvious that both players would be aware of the computer use, anyone reading these forums would be aware of it.

Secodnly, as far as thinking that you are stupid, I think that if a poll was taken of the people on this site of what their opinion of you is, "stupid" would be towards the bottom of the list, if it appeared at all.

 I absolutely agree -- my putt-putt offer still stands, and stands firm....

The more you post, the more you reveal yourself.

No real life GM has ever matched consistently with an engine.  That's the reasoning behind modern cheating detection methods, such as the ones used on this site and others.   Any self respecting 'cheater' would know that!

At this point you're losing my interest.  If you ever want to accept my terms (original or revised) you come to me.  I'll be here. 

ih8sens... I thought that too, about the 100% agreement thing. People who know much more than me seem to say otherwise. You can find their assertions in batgirl's "evaluations wanted" thread...

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/evaluations-wanted

I assure you, there is never 100% matchups when you use proper analysis techniques.. the CM analysis is more of a blunder check.

 Engine use detection does not neccesarily work perfectly (I'm a living example of that!) but it IS usually pretty accurate.

ih8sens, first off, there are no modern anti cheating detection methods used by this site at all. Second off, there are NO anti cheating methods used by ANY site, as there is no such thing. I have cheated on ICC (the self proclaimed strictest, most reputable chess site in existance) many many times masquerading as a GM. ICC's anti cheating detection methods consisted of a few dozen masters complaining to the administrators that I was SOOOOOOO good that I had to be a program. I bruised their egos time and time again, and seeing they earned the title GM, there is no way in the universe that ANYONE could beat them every single time. That's why I LOATHE IM's, GM's, etc. They are cry babies. I emailed dozens of game logs to ICC admin saying, "look at move number 18. I dont need a program to tell me that I should trade my bishop for his rook and pawn." 3 points for 6..simple math...DUH. Simply put, not even Kasparov could tell if he was playing a program or not if it were configured properly. And seeing there is no one here even near his capabilities, it is 100% IMPOSSIBLE to detect cheating.

Finally, ih8sens...I must politely decline ANY future game offers with you. When you can run that marathon without a weeks' rest inbetween each mile (Dang I love that analogy of what correspondence chess is like), then I'll be here....waiting..... in the shadows.

here is your chance:

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/cheater1-vs-chesscom

:) 

This is something that people have a hard time understanding.  A chess engine doesn't/shouldn't make any moves that break chess rules, so it would be impossible to tell that a human wasn't making the moves...

"I have cheated on ICC (the self proclaimed strictest, most reputable chess site in existance) many many times masquerading as a GM..."

Not a great thing to admit to...

"Simply put, not even Kasparov could tell if he was playing a program or not if it were configured properly. And seeing there is no one here even near his capabilities, it is 100% IMPOSSIBLE to detect cheating..."

Another example of what people believe a computer is able to do, but doesn't hold up in real life.  Kasparov isn't playing against an engine, a computer, a dead guy, or even another GM.  He's playing a game of chess, and everything boils down to the right move for the right situation.  Part of the reason that GM's can beat mediocre programs all the time is that they're only as good as the person that programmed them.  But since Fritz, Rybka, etc. often get revised based on real-life GM play, the programs get better with every iteration.  For example, I read an article on the Halloween Gambit recently that pointed out that Fritz 8 plays it.  However, my copy of Fritz (ver. 6) doesn't seem to know it.

If you use a computer to make your moves, and so does your opponent, the best that either of you can hope for is a draw.  Real life situations show that great players consistantly beat kibitzers, so there is definitely something more going on above the belt other than awesome computing power.

I admire your ability to gain publicity, cheater... BUT you are lame... my point has already been proven and this vote game will not help your case... the majority of players on here are under 1600 and would be crushed by an engine.