How to Report Suspected Cheating

Yes it is 9 days per move.  On the 10th day the last player to move can click 'end game' and it counts as a win, after 15 then either can click 'end game' and it's a draw.

 im not sure.

its happened to me, i thought he/she was cheating because he/she aways took 2 minutes to move, but how do you prove it, i voiced my suspicion, but no reply.

i agree with cajunboy, what,s the point.

 Thank you Eric for this post for I've been slaundered by many of people like a pack of Hyenas over the last couple of months in the forums for they are convinced that I've got multiple accounts,maybe they'll bury thier pride and let me be as I am.

Not that I take thier lies serious for I tend to laugh in the face of ignorance,live and let live.

                 The quiet before the storm,lol!

Let us not be harsh in passing judgement.

A slow-thinker (ponderer) may play poorly under time limits whereas play much better in 3-day correspondence chess because he has got lots of time to think. Again a quick thinker (blitzer) may be too impatient to think deeply - he will do well in lightning chess but badly in a correspondence one.

Actually ratings for time-limited games and ratings for correspondence games should be separate and not linked together. They test two different faculties of a player - ability to think quickly, and the ability to think deeply.

I am totally against the equation “takes time to think =  is cheating”

Look at me, for example. By looking at my games, I can see that the vast majority of my losses against similarly rated players are not due to me ignoring some theory about the game, but to totally avoidable blunders.

I have been advised, to eliminate this problem, to play slow games and to ponder on each move: one bad move is enough to lose a game, and to cancel the previous 20/30/40 good moves. As a result, I seldom use less than one minute per move, because I try to sanity check every single move, even the most obvious ones.

This is why it is typically very difficult to find opponents: I normally play on Playchess.com, where they have a group of similarly minded people who like playing slow games, and that is almost the only chance I have. Whenever I ask, on the general channel, why nobody wants to play some slow game, the usual answer is: “because there are too many cheaters on long times”.

But, please, do not always assume that, if somebody is using time to think, he/she is automatically a cheater!

There is a big difference between correspondence chess and here, in correspondence chess you are allowed use computers. I also think its impossible to catch people who are cheating. People might not even have to cheat for a whole game just one move and they have a big advantage saying that i think most people know its a possiblity when they play turn based chess and its something that is impossible to stop.

you're not allowed to use computers in correspondence chess either

I know one person who play's at my chess club who is a very strong player but has no rating and never has. He not quite master level but he has played and beaten masters in unrated games. He beats me with no problem. You can tell for sure what he would rated if he played rated FIDE or USCF games, but he is clearly a strong play. Although it is rare there are some very strong chess players who don't have ratings.

But I should also note, his style of play is pretty creative and would not be mistaken for a chess engine.

I am polyarthritic.

I have to take not only scheduled-time antihypertensives, but SOS antihypertensives too.

I need antipanic med. SOS.

So if I were to play livechess, my rating would be novice-level. [I did play some quickchess games a few months ago here..]

Whereas, at correspondence chess[1], by chess.com standards, [though by no means by world standards] I am fairly strong - 2000+.

Why? Because I can choose to ponder over a move only when I am feeling well. Because I am never under that sort of time pressure which makes one move *very* fast and would cause me aching wrists and back-of-hand, sending my concentration for a toss.

Because I do not play an absurd number of games at a time.

Again, if I float a 'proper' time control livechess challenge - say 3 hour/game + 30 sec increment/ move; I think I'd never get a game. That is true of *all* sites offering live chess. So online livechess does *not* simulate  OTB chess. fact of life.

At 'live chess' here I can lose to someone who just learnt *some* of the rules of chess - who doesn't yet know that there is such a move as castling. How? By losing connection for no fault of mine. Can never happen OTB.

As if there were not problems enough already with online chess, chess.com powers that be decide that loss before move 4 does not affect ratings. I fail to see any logic in that. [2]

So, a person's correspondence-chess[1] rating, online 'live chess' rating, and their [scale-adjusted]-elo[fide]-or-uscf rating can all three differ extremely widely  for a variety of genuine reasons.

[1] more accurately, what chess.com offers is not correspondence-chess proper [e.g. see iccf rules on iccf website] but no-engines-no-tablebases correspondence chess.

[2] A site like fics is an even worse culprit in this respect: there if black falls into that stupid trap 1. e4 e5 2. d4 f6 3. dxe5 fxe5 4. Qh5+ g6 5. Qxe5+ then black can get away with it by simply resigning - because a game is not counted as having taken place until white's 6th move has been made!

Sadly about 100% of the cheat-whiners here do not get this simple point.

recipe for creating any one of the cheat-whiner-'thinkers-are-cheats'-types whose noisiness fills this site:

Take those two characters in that Edward Albee play whose name I can't recall just now - who are sitting on a park-bench and start fighting about space on that park bench... (1 part). [park-bench space in that play corresponds to rating points here]

Take serious attention-deficit disorder (1 part).

Take plain idiocy (1 part).

Take temperament of mule. (1 part).

Mix well.

Add seasoning to taste.

Flush the dish down the toilet.

It still amazes me that anyone would cheat at anything especially chess. I guess it surprises me because by trade, I'm a guitar player and you can't really cheat at your ability to play. You either play well or you don/t. To get good you have to practice, analyze your playing, and improve upon your technique. Hey, that sounds like playing chess! I'm an OK player and that's fine with me. The biggest high I get is when I see improvements in my game (or guitar playing) and those improvements come from working hard. It's your reward for that hard work. The only person who looses when cheating is the cheater. Man, this is the one place I didn't expect to see people cheating. Come on you cheaters, just work on your game more and you'll reap the rewards. Practice, practice, practice. Save the cheating for your income tax. You think being caught cheating is bad on Chess.com? Try cheating the IRS and see what happens (the one thing even I would never do since the IRS seems to have more power than the laws of physics)!

I agree about the sudden rise to talent. I lost to a player who said she just started to play last year and got good by studying the games of GMs!!!! Talk about FAST learning!!

cheating in chess? im not that old it justseems silly 2 me a game whats there 2 gain?  help explain my ignorance 

grey- there are people in chess as in life who feel they must be the best (or at least better) even if it means cheating to get there. In a game such as ours, they really don't hurt anyone but themselves, but in life... they can get to powerful positions that way and end up hurting many (including themselves).

i wonder how people know someone is cheating?  maybe in live chess it's easier to tell but with turn-based it would be tough.

Thanks Erik for starting another forum that is just as whiny as the person actually complaining about someone taking away their valuable rating points that will stop their heart and suck out the last of their air like a succubus and lead to their inevitable deaths because we all know that cheaters out their are all against you and only you. Who cares if someone cheats against you, it means they're weak minded and sad little ppl. Thanks a ton Erik for reminding everyone that you would rather write this forum than actually work for a living and listen to our concerns from your couch as you play chess all day, drink beer and actually give your kids the attention my father never gave me. God I envy you. Life must be so hard...

j/k erik dont ban me! I love chess.com Except for those harrassing pop-ups!

Seriously, what is the point of cheating? I mean the hard work that goes into improving your game rewards you when you honestly wins. Not to mention, the computer will not play like a human. Good luck explaining an analytical move based on ten thousand nano speed calculations! " Well you see, I call this move The Sicilian French Caro Lasker Double Dipsy Doodle Knight to c3 Variation!" Oh yeah, that sounds right! Cheaters chould be forced to wear a toilet seat around their necks with the chess.com logo on it (in a really public place)!

Hi guys. I think it depends on your goal. If you want to be a stronger player even if your opponent cheats with PC I think it is ok. This is why I am here to learn more. so even my opponent cheats as long that I can learn from his moves and I gain experience. Wherein I can apply it on face to face game then thats good.