Is XXXXXXXX a cheater (spoiler, yes)

So this pathetic excuse for a man, ------ has a daily record of, W 366 51% - L 166 23% - D 181 25%. A full 25% of his games ends in a draw. He has more draws than losses. Dunno about you, but I only draw a little over 3% of the time. If he knows he's losing he offers draw every turn till the bitter end, and he doesn't resign. I'm guessing almost all those draws are from people accidently clicking the check. 

He also plays tourneys almost exclusively. He's turning over HALF of his losses into draws, which has to greatly improve his tournament results. Gotta be lots of groups he advances from and someone else unfairly doesn't. 

Is this consider cheating? Or do they just say "eh you shouldn't click check" and it's just really cheap. To me it's cheating. 

I mocked him mercilessly, as one should, till he finally blocked me. I'm not one for running to authority unless no other option. But telling someone that their behavior is patheticly unbecoming of a man is much less effective when you can't look them in the eye. 

Here's the game I realized something was up. 

I made maybe my best ever sacrifice against him. Gave up a knight for what ended up being a rook and 4 pawns took out his whole right side by move 18, mated him move 49. He spent the entire time in between prolonging the game while offering a draw every move. 

[As noted, public accusations in the forums aren't welcomed.  Neither are discussion on cheating, or even just suggesting cheating. All that is reserved for the Cheating Forum Club  which you can join. 
I edited out the name and locked the thread. ---CrystalMoon]

They will probably lock this thread because of one word.

Do yourself a favor and edit it out of the title and body now. 

It is an interesting situation.

I thought there is a way to stop multiple draw offers.

Plus, it sounds like he is a candidate for the poor sport rating.

Which word ch**ter? I thought I was fairly restrained in how I talked about him myself.

If I say is he cheating, is that different? 

Yes, ch**ter,ch**ting and all variants. You could even remove the name. 

The point is- they don't like public accusations.

It would still be an interesting discussion without the name.

The best place for such a discussion is in the Ch**Ting Forum. There would probably be some who defend the behavior.

I didn't notice a forum like that. Without the name, it's pointless. Calling him out is the entire point. Cause if it isn't cheating he should be ashamed of himself anyway. And he's clearly the type do only feels shame if what he does is public knowledge. Maybe not even then. 

Which forum are you referring to? I'm going to move it there and wussify my post for today's PC age, damned if I won't still mention his name though. I don't see one labeled the ch**ting forum however. 

Until I started playing on chess.com, most of my chess experience was in prison. I can't help but think how things would go for a guy like that in there, whenever something like this comes up. I can just picture him whining "come on give me a draw" after every move. Some people would give it to him cause they were sick of hearing it, others would, well I'd best not mention the other likelihoods. 

I think he draws a lot because he's timid on taking chances  and will seize the inititive if he spots a solid offensive move. He probaly lacks the ability to create inititives on his own, so he waits until his opponent stumbles in their attack.

The art of defence isn't about preventing your opponent from attacking, it's about defending in a way that creates opportunities to go on the offensive at some point. Essentially laying landmines so you have multiple avenues to start attacking instead of just defending.

Players that can't do that end up in perpetual defense mode, so draws are the only option if you never get the inititive.

This thread can be said to have a half-life, and it is short.  

I made sure I wasn't following it. Lol

You don't like going to authority, but you'll post about it publicly?  I don't mean to be critical - I'm just not sure I agree that going to the tabloids before going to the police is the right idea - if you get my meaning.