Thoughts and comments welcome
________ Are Ruining Online Chess
Sort:
Jul 1, 2022
0
#4
There are always many people who say, that this and that is very suspicious, but honestly I only once felt like that I have played with a cheater when I lost against some person under 1000.. There are many people of course, with who I have played and who were then closed for cheating and so.. but it's not like I would able to predict that..
Jul 1, 2022
0
#5
There are always many people who say, that this and that is very suspicious, but honestly I only once felt like that I have played with a cheater when I lost against some person under 1000.. There are many people of course, with who I have played and who were then closed for cheating and so.. but it's not like I would able to predict that..
I hear ya, and Man I wish you were right.
Unfortunately it's not just me who is suspicious
GM Daniel Naroditsky
IM Levy Rozman
Jul 1, 2022
0
#6
Danya might have to cancel his sensei speedrun series due to the massive influx of "suspicious players"
I can’t tell if this is a legitimate complaint or just frustration because of losing more than you win at the current state of time.
Jul 1, 2022
0
#8
Civilian366 wrote:
GM Daniel Naroditsky
Aww, poor baby. GM masquerading as a 1900 gets beat by an engine masquerading as a 1900.
Truth is they deserve each other.
Jul 1, 2022
0
#9
Civilian366 wrote:
Thoughts and comments welcome
There's a reason strong players avoid long games online.
But if you must play rapid, then check your opponent's account before making the first move. Check if they're very new or have won all their games or have had a recent large increase in rating. Other clues are a very low speed rating with a very high rapid rating. If they're suspicious, then abort.
Also report every single person you lose to. Maybe only 1 in 10 is a cheater, but you'll get some free rating points when they're banned.
Of course this isn't as important at lower ratings, but that's generally how I'd approach it.
Jul 1, 2022
0
#10
Civilian366 wrote:
Danya might have to cancel his sensei speedrun series due to the massive influx of "suspicious players"
Isn't the point that it's instructive to see a much weaker player lose badly?
Isn't that what happens when he accidentally plays an engine?
Why cancel it?
Jul 1, 2022
0
#11
Uživatel Civilian366 napsal:
There are always many people who say, that this and that is very suspicious, but honestly I only once felt like that I have played with a cheater when I lost against some person under 1000.. There are many people of course, with who I have played and who were then closed for cheating and so.. but it's not like I would able to predict that..
I hear ya, and Man I wish you were right.
Unfortunately it's not just me who is suspicious
GM Daniel Naroditsky
IM Levy Rozman
I am not saying that people don't cheat..
I am just saying that I am not able to tell who do that and who not from a single game..
for example in the first video I don't see any real prove that the person cheated
Yes, they played that well but when I have a good game I am able to do even more then 95.5 accuracy... you can say that the person could be cheater more likely then somebody else but what does the more likely means anyway? Maybe they had I good day.. maybe only he did fall in some line what they knew well.. How you can be sure?
I understand that when people at cc have programs for seeking cheaters and all their games and statistics that then they can tell from that something.. but pointing around and saying that this is a cheater because they played something too well feels bed to me..
maybe he was right I don't know.. I don't like blaming people without real proves...
Jul 1, 2022
0
#12
FoxWithNekoEars wrote:
in the first video I don't see any real prove that the person cheated
It was extremely obvious, and in any case the account was banned for cheating.
Jul 1, 2022
0
#13
Uživatel nMsALpg napsal:
FoxWithNekoEars wrote:
in the first video I don't see any real prove that the person cheated
It was extremely obvious, and in any case the account was banned for cheating.
Sure if the account was closed for cheating I will take it as a fact.
But what is so obvious about it?
Jul 1, 2022
0
#14
FoxWithNekoEars wrote:
Uživatel nMsALpg napsal:
FoxWithNekoEars wrote:
in the first video I don't see any real prove that the person cheated
It was extremely obvious, and in any case the account was banned for cheating.
Sure if the account was closed for cheating I will take it as fact.
But what is so obvious about it?
Moved at a constant pace. Took same time for obvious moves as difficult moves...
... even the mate in 1 took the same ~5 seconds. This is one of the most obvious signs someone is cheating and isn't smart enough (or doesn't care enough) to hide it. That's about the time it takes to manually transfer a move from some program to your chess.com game.
Jul 1, 2022
0
#15
Uživatel nMsALpg napsal:
FoxWithNekoEars wrote:
Uživatel nMsALpg napsal:
FoxWithNekoEars wrote:
in the first video I don't see any real prove that the person cheated
It was extremely obvious, and in any case the account was banned for cheating.
Sure if the account was closed for cheating I will take it as fact.
But what is so obvious about it?
Moved at a constant pace. Took same time for obvious moves as difficult moves...
... even the mate in 1 took the same ~5 seconds. This is one of the most obvious signs someone is cheating and isn't smart enough (or doesn't care enough) to hide it. That's about the time it takes to manually transfer a move from some program to your chess.com game.
mhm.. interesting.. its true that this feels kinda suspicious when you go through the game and notice it.. I wouldn't call it a prove.. but I understand why did you come to the conclusion..
Civilian366 skrev:
Danya might have to cancel his sensei speedrun series due to the massive influx of "suspicious players"
Has Danya ever said that he might have to cancel his speedruns or is that you spectulating?
Jul 1, 2022
0
#17
CooloutAC wrote:
nMsALpg wrote:
Civilian366 wrote:
Thoughts and comments welcome
There's a reason strong players avoid long games online.
But if you must play rapid, then check your opponent's account before making the first move. Check if they're very new or have won all their games or have had a recent large increase in rating. Other clues are a very low speed rating with a very high rapid rating. If they're suspicious, then abort.
Also report every single person you lose to. Maybe only 1 in 10 is a cheater, but you'll get some free rating points when they're banned.
Of course this isn't as important at lower ratings, but that's generally how I'd approach it.
I've never believed this. I think the most cheaters are in the most popular and competitive time control, and that is definitely not rapid.
The reason why the top players don't play long time controls, is because why would they want to? As Ding Liren said "speed chess means more games and more chances". Its more entertaining and sporting since its even more about exercised skills than memory and prep. I mean bullet is the time control on chess.com with the widest skill gap.
Other than cheating, stalling makes long games online extremely annoying. Imagine a 60 minute game where your opponent decides to stop moving... chess sites have not done enough to prevent this IMO.
But sure, maybe I should have also noted that blitz and bullet are just a lot of fun -- a bit addicting even.
Jul 1, 2022
0
#18
CooloutAC wrote:
nMsALpg wrote:
CooloutAC wrote:
nMsALpg wrote:
Civilian366 wrote:
Thoughts and comments welcome
There's a reason strong players avoid long games online.
But if you must play rapid, then check your opponent's account before making the first move. Check if they're very new or have won all their games or have had a recent large increase in rating. Other clues are a very low speed rating with a very high rapid rating. If they're suspicious, then abort.
Also report every single person you lose to. Maybe only 1 in 10 is a cheater, but you'll get some free rating points when they're banned.
Of course this isn't as important at lower ratings, but that's generally how I'd approach it.
I've never believed this. I think the most cheaters are in the most popular and competitive time control, and that is definitely not rapid.
The reason why the top players don't play long time controls, is because why would they want to? As Ding Liren said "speed chess means more games and more chances". Its more entertaining and sporting since its even more about exercised skills than memory and prep. I mean bullet is the time control on chess.com with the widest skill gap.
Other than cheating, stalling makes long games online extremely annoying.
But sure, maybe I should have also noted that blitz and bullet are just a lot of fun -- a bit addicting even.
Yes but you can claim victory after a certain amount of time on lichess and chess.com. So you are wrong they absolutely do prevent it. I exclusively play 30 min and 5 min games. Stalling only seems to be a big problem on lichess in blitz matches ironically. Don't really see a stalling problem in 30 min or ever at all on chess.com.
Eh, isn't it easy to grief though?
You just wait the maximum amount of time after each move.
Jul 1, 2022
0
#19
Uživatel nMsALpg napsal:
Civilian366 wrote:
Thoughts and comments welcome
There's a reason strong players avoid long games online.
But if you must play rapid, then check your opponent's account before making the first move. Check if they're very new or have won all their games or have had a recent large increase in rating. Other clues are a very low speed rating with a very high rapid rating. If they're suspicious, then abort.
Also report every single person you lose to. Maybe only 1 in 10 is a cheater, but you'll get some free rating points when they're banned.
Of course this isn't as important at lower ratings, but that's generally how I'd approach it.
nMsALpg skrev:
CooloutAC wrote:
nMsALpg wrote:
CooloutAC wrote:
nMsALpg wrote:
Civilian366 wrote:
Thoughts and comments welcome
There's a reason strong players avoid long games online.
But if you must play rapid, then check your opponent's account before making the first move. Check if they're very new or have won all their games or have had a recent large increase in rating. Other clues are a very low speed rating with a very high rapid rating. If they're suspicious, then abort.
Also report every single person you lose to. Maybe only 1 in 10 is a cheater, but you'll get some free rating points when they're banned.
Of course this isn't as important at lower ratings, but that's generally how I'd approach it.
I've never believed this. I think the most cheaters are in the most popular and competitive time control, and that is definitely not rapid.
The reason why the top players don't play long time controls, is because why would they want to? As Ding Liren said "speed chess means more games and more chances". Its more entertaining and sporting since its even more about exercised skills than memory and prep. I mean bullet is the time control on chess.com with the widest skill gap.
Other than cheating, stalling makes long games online extremely annoying.
But sure, maybe I should have also noted that blitz and bullet are just a lot of fun -- a bit addicting even.
Yes but you can claim victory after a certain amount of time on lichess and chess.com. So you are wrong they absolutely do prevent it. I exclusively play 30 min and 5 min games. Stalling only seems to be a big problem on lichess in blitz matches ironically. Don't really see a stalling problem in 30 min or ever at all on chess.com.
Eh, isn't it easy to grief though?
You just wait the maximum amount of time after each move.
Lol that reminds me on when I played an 180 minute game on Lichess and my opponent blundered a piece like 10 min in to the game. He spammed takeback, because he wanted that piece back. I just declined. Then he waited one hour before making the next move. Then he started to spam takeback again and then he waited one more hour before doing the next move. I have not played 180 min games since then.
“1500 rated players who play like engines periodically during games, coincidentally when losing”