Players who purposefully keep a low rating

I have played several players with lower ratings or ratings similar to mine who were obviously well above their actual rating. I see this all the time in tournaments. Players with < 1000 ratings who were more like 1400-1600 players. Another example is a player with a similar rating to me who destroys me in a game and right at the end resigns for no other reason than to keep their lower rating.

Are there any rules against this? It's certainly unethical and unfair. I've quit playing chess.com on two occasions because of it, and am considering closing my account again because it unfair and frustrating. What do others do in cases such as this?

Yes, this is sandbagging and is unethical. Chess.com is trying to crack down on it as well as they can, however, it is not as straightforward as finding someone who is using an engine for cheating. Danny Rensch said in his State of Chess.com 2020 Quarter 1 talk yesterday that "obviously it's not the most common form of cheating, usually it's engine cheating in terms of the masses that we close, but we do also close people for sandbagging." So, the short answer is yes, there are rules in place against sandbagging, or dropping your rating for an advantage against opponents.

Thank you CricketViolin. That is reassuring. I just reported the last person I played for doing this. It seems there would be an algorithm that would be able to detect players who do this on a frequent basis.

So those people value more a trophy in a tournament for 1000s than being able to participate in one for 1400s? This is beyond my understanding.

No they play open tournaments but only play opponents of similar rating, so they get ez wins

Many of the bullet arenas I used to play were won by people who were rated like 1000 

Anyway. I'd rather be a small elephant than a large mouse.

I've had the same experience.

Pulpofeira, I'm with you. I don't understand them. It seems like a bully tactic. A stronger player beating up on weaker opponents.

If a player is obviously sandbagging their rating, they should be reported.

https://support.chess.com/article/208-what-is-a-sandbagger

https://support.chess.com/article/209-how-do-i-report-someone

well i mean if they resign then I wouldn't be too upset =)

But yeah sandbagging isn't really ethical.

Sometimes people resign when in a won position when theu have to do something urgent or their phone dies or sonething like that

It happens to me sometimes

Wait, why does it matter in normal play? Sure, if they are entering tournaments, they are sandbagging - as the rules state. "If a player has a long string of losses right before they entered a tournament, they might be a sandbagger." But normal play is just play. So what if they resign before they win, did you get to play? This is a great way for you as the lower ranked to play a higher rank. I routinely kill my score when I start makign stupid, blunderous moves. Like today. Playing lower ranked players lets me get my focus back and I generally climb a bit higher. So what, this not a cheat, I don't do tournaments and there is NO consequence to anyone. I also don't hide it, I sometimes give tips and many players are very grateful.  I also often find others who do the same. So what?

I also notice the great difference in attitudes of the lower ranked players, they are more friendly, most of my friends come from <600. 

So they resign, what exactly did you lose? I routinely resign double-digit points ahead at any level when I make a stupid blunder, it ruins the game for me. So I resign 27 points ahead, what did you lose again?

Yeah I’ve experienced this a lot lately in bullet...players 1000-1200s playing like they’re 2000-2100s...I don’t understand it.

Chess.com should do something similar as Lichess; when creating a game you can only play +/- 500 points your rating...no 1200s beating the crap out of 2000s.

You’d figure sandbaggers would get bored doing this especially when there’s nothing to gain from it, and in the end you only get rusty from not playing your true peers.

I know a guy who once joined and played a tournament to get their rating up, but I don't think that counts

Nov 9, 2021. Same. Still. Lost against users half my rating in tourns.

But. actually, how chess.com could fix the problem?
How to distinguish between an honest player playing 20 games in a row in a drunk mode (losing 500) and a "cheater"?

This sort of "sandbagging" only makes sense in the US, and nowhere else in the world. This is because Americans have an insane system: they create tournament sections based on ratings, and then they give prizes in all sections. This actively urges people to try to keep their rating low and try to win an easy prize.

Doing this on chess.com has no other purpose than pure trolling. Or are there rating-based tournaments here where you can win money? I don't know about that.

I just played against several like that. This people need a Hug or a applause? Its ok... You are best than me and you do not make any mistakes despite you apprentice like me. This people is trash and broke the experience. Why they do that?

My blitz/bullet ratings are about 650 and I do sometimes see players like you who play quite well.  I agree with you that you are helping, because when I look at these games, I see you are not using an engine, just that your  moves are all sensible and in many cases something I might have found myself if I had the time.  So you make a good game for me. 

I especially agree with your last point  about you resigning when you are way up in material:

if you used your better ability or just having a better game to get way up on me in material and you  prefer to resign to save us both the time of finishing an obvious win for you,  you are doing me a favor, because I generally want the game to end too.  I personally see no value in fighting on other than a little try with my major pieces or two bishops to try to trap you somewhere, and once the pieces are traded down so that even if you hand me your queen I still can't win, then I prefer to get it over with too.  It's not ego, I just see no learning value to me or you in playing on hoping for you to suddenly play horribly and give me the game, especially with someone like you who already showed you can play.  

I have respect for players at my rating level who play on to checkmate with an endgame of my three pawns and bishop and queen against just their pawns.  Maybe they are practicing flagging me or  trying for stalemate, so I just view that as part of the sport at my level, but I always resign when I am that far down unless their clock is dire for them.  So if you are crushing me and resign instead before I get to resigning myself, great.

It irritates me so much because multiple times playing in tournaments I make it to the final few players left in an under 1000 tournament and I end up playing a 600 or even as low as like 400 once and they haven't lost a game the entire tournament and just destroy. It's ridiculous that these sad lonely individuals have to manipulate there ratings to go play weaker opponents so they can win and think they accomplished something in. Rant over! Lol

Some of us just aren’t that good and are learning how to play better. I thought I was ok until playing here, and I suck! But I’m not trying to have a low rating on purpose.