Why do I keep losing against newly created accounts?

Yes they could! But statistically speaking, would be weird knowing at 2200, we are already over the 99,8% percentile of players (around 18,000,000 on the website). Plus you have clear clues, when you are able to fight against 2200-2300 titled players (verified accounts and the only ones to maybe risk something of being called cheaters) and not being able to anticipate moves from a -6 months recent accounts... There is a clear issue that chess.com should take on seriously...

Chess.com cannot be bothered to care about cheating. They can barely keep the lights on at this point. My sub is being cancelled for this reason. If they decide to get serious about tackling cheating I will come back.

I checked out one of the three games that you list here, and I thought it was great stuff, objectively. That opponent played 162 games since February of which 100 were won. Clearly hasn't plateaued yet, but chess.com should pair this player to stronger opponents in the next few weeks, which will balance out the win ratio.

You really think so? They have a terrible anti-cheat, theres no humans checking out blatant cheaters, there's no verification method to hinder the process of creating new accounts, there's no "play x amount of games to join the ranked queue" etcetc. There's so much they can do.

You need a larger sample size.

Yes, but it's not the one you outline.

The issue they don't take seriously at all (IMO because of their gross incompetence) is of players who are very obviously cheating but don't use the engine often enough to be banned.

Some of these players are NOT hard to find. They have, for example, an 800 point gap between their rapid and bullet, and consistently take 5 seconds on every move... or they are an honest rapid player and resign 100s of bullet games on move 10 to keep their bullet rating low.

These players are not hard to detect, but chess.com does nothing about them.

No. Most people are fools, but a few know what they're talking about. You're unable to tell the difference so you throw them all in the same basket.

It is remotely possible you ended up playing  a Master level player, that was using an approved alt account, to practice.

AIUI, any losses to these types of accounts are corrected by Chess.com, at a later date to not reflect on your record.

It's likely just a business decision. There will always be a class of cheaters who, whether by luck or design, cheat just enough to not get caught. Chess.com could argue against me by saying that they catch 98% of all cheaters, and so the ~1% I'm complaining about, while indeed obviously suspect, are not worth the money required to go after them.

My counter to that is it's about the principle of the thing. If you publicly claim you care about cheating then you need to remove all obvious cheaters, even if some forms of obvious cheating require more money than your accountants say they're worth.

I never said you could, but if you read the rest of my comment I stated that at the very least they should make the process of creating accounts/verifying the authenticity more difficult to discourage cheaters. There's no reason not to do this, it's not like new players are going to be shunned because they have to verify their accounts/play training games before queueing in ranked, while for cheaters this will make the process a nuisance. 

Once again, not the point. It won't stop everyone from cheating but it will stop the rate at which they can cheat. Instead of shooting down ideas for no reason, how about state why you disagree or offer a better alternative. 

Okay so do me a favour and explain their current account creation/verification process and explain why that's better than my suggestion. Once again you didn't state why you disagreed with the proposal. You just took the nihilistic approach and said "welp, cheaters gonna cheat". There's never a "solution" but we're offering preventative measures if you stopped being a dunce for a second and listened to them.

Just the right amount of input I expected lol. I'm not "taking it out on you", you just haven't provided anything to the conversation. You simply repeat "that won't work" every comment. You haven't addressed anyones actual concerns in any of your replies, hence that you're a dunce because it took several messages for you to acknowledge you have no alternative and no explanation to why our ideas won't work. I don't understand the point of commenting nothing burgers. If you don't intend to interact with other peoples ideas then why comment?

Perfect, I agree! So actually provide your opinion and insight so people don't have to talk to a brick wall.

I am not yet convinced that cheating is rampant on chess.com, and by rampant I mean more than 2% of the matches. But I am sorry to see that some players are so sore about the possibility, and I hope that they don't quit over this. I am not that attached to my scores. I am participating because I want to become a better player, and if I cross paths with a few cheaters (chess.com blocked two accounts that played against me), it is not going to spoil all the fun for me. 

The higher your elo, the more cheaters you'll verse. I urge you to look at my profile and or blog. 98 cheaters in less than 3 months. Way too many cheaters. I versed on average a cheater a day for a month. They're infested in bullet especially, you'll verse a cheater 1/5 games when you're above ~2200

I think it's because many good player come in as 1200 and they lay waste to people left & right. You may have been the victim of a sandbagger. If there was a way to weed out sandbaggers then when you faced a 1200 it wouldn't feel like stock fish just beat you.

@AndrewBooch thanks for participating! I fully agree that chess.com should implement all the simple tools to make cheating more fastidious. That was totally my point by opening this topic, trying to catch the eye of some staff member so that they see that there is still some work to do on the anti-cheat. 

I also agree that the higher the rating, the more cheaters. It did not really bother me before reaching the 2100 range in blitz around one year ago. Now it is really a lot (too much). 

One argument that people often say is: "the win/loss balance of this person is even". However, some other day, chess.com blocked a recent opponent that I had reported for cheating (very obvious this one) having a tied ratio. 

There is a ton of new accounts that are cheaters I agree. It's too easy to use an engine only some of the time to hide the cheating. I keep running into new accounts that are swiftly rising in rating. They play poor openings then suddenly are choosing best moves.

Poor @AndrewBooch closed his account after having a spin with Hiram. I learned a while back to propitiate Hiram lest he get inside my head like Hannibal Lecter.