Chess.com sucks

That you believe this only proves how little you know. You are not an expert. Your opinions or best guesses have zero value, mouth off all you like.

I'm sure there are many players who cheat with engines, but 60% is a very large estimate.

Perhaps you're confusing alt accounts with cheaters? There are probably a large number of experienced players who create newer accounts - so it would feel like they are "cheating" because their skill level is much higher than their rating.

Speedrunners and sandbaggers are certainly a problem - but I wouldn't lump them into the category of "cheaters". I'd call them "rating manipulators" ...

But yes, a lot of these players make the game more frustrating for the lower-level players who are just trying to play against equal opponents.

Yep, that might be the case too. Still, it's a form of cheating that ruins the game, as we both agree.

And you're making that statement based on what, exactly? With all due respect, you signed up three years ago and don’t seem very active. Maybe try a bit more humility when speaking to someone who’s been on this app for over a decade.

Such precise numbers? its like you spent hours not researching them.? gathered with absolute scientific imagination?

The difference is that you are claiming to know more than you actually do... or if you have any evidence that is more than anecdotal or speculative, you aren't sharing it. When I say, 1% to 3% is the common estimate, I'm not referring to an estimate that *I* have made. I can site sources, including acknowledged cheating expert Ken Regan, if it needs to go that far. Can you? And no, chess.com haters like Hans Niemann and Vladimir Kramnik don't count.

I'm speaking from my own experience of thousands of games, along with what I hear from friends and other sources. Of course, it's not scientific, but I think we can all agree that Chess.com misses most cheaters, especially the ones who aren’t blatantly using top engine moves every turn. So the real numbers are likely much higher than the declared 1%–3%.

Hearsay isnt the best way to crunch numbers? Cheating happens no doubt, but throwing around big percentages without proof is like trying to pick a movie based on the poster, mostly just a shot in the dark?

It must really suck to be you. Go elsewhere then and stop with the BS.

hahahha! LOVE IT! Yeah, there are whiners and complainers and sometimes there are cheaters. It's called LIFE. But if you want to complain then go to X where or facebook where complainers are treated like royalty. THEY ARE NOT. They are someone who refuses to look inward at their own failings. Thanks for the perfect response to those people.

Again, I’m speaking from my own experience. Maybe I’m exaggerating a bit, but I still think the real numbers are closer to mine than what the official stats suggest. I guess we’ll never really know.

Exaggerating numbers without proof spreads distrust and harms the site you say you support? if we never really know? then why throw out wild guesses? just make the point it exists? maybe it's better not to guess at all. Thats my last point, as we are not supposed to be discussing the subject at all.

Chess.com isn't really a chess-centric site as much as it is about making money and it has a lot of casino-like mechanisms in there which I will be doing an expository video on. This has gone on too long, Chess.com is due for some big changes.

LibreChess, and Red Hot Pawn are better, and I would say LibreChess is the gold standard except Chess.com does have sits own exclusive content that you can't get anywhere else.

You're pretending to know more than you really do. That you've played thousands of games means nothing unless you're an expert in cheat detection... if that's your claim, "credentials please". The same goes for all your friends, unless one of them is Ken Regan, I suppose. Like most, you're "pretty sure" you can tell, but it's not a mystery, it's been studied: the average person, by average means, excluding the most flagrant examples, simply cannot tell. Almost all accusations of cheating are bogus, demonstrating nothing more than poor sportsmanship. It's just too complicated and requires data you don't have, and analysis of much more than just one game (excluding, again, very dumb/ flagrant cheating). Chess.com's cheat detection system, generally considered far and away the best in history, examines both statistics and behavior, analyzing move patterns, comparing moves to engine recommendations, looking for anomalies, analyzing time usage and winning streaks, etc. And they analyze approximately 20 million games per day. No one outside of the Fair Play team has access to any actual data produced, but the idea that you or your friends know better is absurd. It's difficult to say how many of us really are scumbag/ poor sports enough to stoop to cheating. But figures like 30% or 50% or 60%? BS. I'll never buy it. Of all the people I have EVER known, even 3% seems high. 
Unlike actual cheating, however, accusations of cheating are very common, predictably. For so many - too many -- having the tradition that it has, chess is a kind of ersatz IQ test, unwarranted or not, thus often creating self-esteem issues. We see thiis all the time, throughout these forums, and in this very thread. When a player perceives themself as being unsuccessful, they look for an excuse, "hop on board the Kramnik Express"... "I'm a smart guy... the only reason my rating is low is all these cheaters... everyone agrees, just ask my friends or watch those YouTube videos: cheaters cheaters everywhere!", or (ha ha), "I don't suck. Chess.com sucks". So... actual cheating remains rare. Maybe 3% of games, at most , the best guess, involve cheating, but the subject of cheating becomes a huge hit, videos about it go viral, and wild estimates abound, and everyone and his brother join threads like this and mouth off, pretending knowledge they do not have, and cannot possibly have... "obviously"... "clearly"... "everyone knows"... "all my friends agree"... "I've played thousands of games".

Where are you getting these numbers?

cynical, also complete BS

It's not a non-profit, correct, but that doesn't mean those who run it are not also passionate about chess. Your attitude conflicts with what we know and the idea they've just been pretending seems more than just a little bit wild.

More generally, since your idea would seem to favor not-for-profit Lichess, I'm reminded of the old argument about Linux vs Windows.

"Yes, we know you think Microsoft is pure evil for charging money for their products but they work, and people like them."

If you actually believe that, why are you still here? It's not illegal to switch. Anyway, if it's true those two platforms are better, it's a bit mysterious you must think, that Lichess is the second choice and -- these are the latest numbers (please use Googe if you think I'm making it up): chess.com is the first, by a factor of ten. For every 1 player that chooses Lichess, there are ten who choose chess.com, not 2, not 3, not 5, ten.

If you truly think Chess.com sucks? LibreChess is the gold standard? then why are you still wasting your time here? still playing games daily, commenting, whining and making videos about it? Sounds like you’re less about change and more about attention seeking, maybe its not the site you hate? but yourself for not leaving?

Exactly. And it is harmful, Chess.com has it right to discourage talk of cheating except where it's fairly out of view. It helps nothing. If anything it encourages cheating. Anyone buying the idea might think, "Well, I guess I should just level the playing field", else get paranoid and start suspecting everyone, then cheat themselves whenever they suspect their opponent of cheating... chess engine vs chess engine.

And they always insist that chess.com doesn't care and doesn't act. That chess.com analyzes millions of games every day and closes about one account per minute doesn't impress them one bit. They like their narrative. They're keeping it.