Why doesn't every team match end in a draw?

When I play two games against a stronger opponent, my expected result is less than one point.

When I play two games simultaneously with opposite colors (as is the case in team matches) against a stronger opponent, I can get a result of one point by mirroring his moves. Example:

Him on Board 1: 1. e4
Me on Board 2: 1. e4
Him on Board 2: 1. ... e5
Me on Board 1: 1. ... e5
Him on Board 1: 2. Nf3
Me on Board 2: 2. Nf3

This could go on until the end of the game and the points I lose with Black I win with White and vice versa.

Obviously this takes the fun out of the game, so this is not an option for someone interested in playing chess. From a game theoretical standpoint, this is still the best strategy for the weaker player.

How does chess.com handle this case? Is it considered cheating, or is it just unsportsmanlike?

It is absolutely cheating.

Cheating, report at once.

During the Spassky-Fischer match in 1972, an entertainer and magician called Romark issued a challenge to play blindfold and simultaneously against them both for $125000. Presumably that's what he had in mind as well, so that Spassky and Fischer would actually be playing each other, not him. 

By following someone's line past the opening, it is considered cheating.

Are you mirroring his moves for black as well?  So you let him go first on his white side and then you move for your white and then wait for his black move and make the same move?  If that is the case, you are cheating.  Also, you are just sitting in on a solitary game of your opponent, how is that worth your while.  I can see studying a game to learn from higher rated players, but you are defeating the whole purpose of the game.

Put it this way if you copy each others move and white checkmates black.... how does black respond?

Although I disapprove of the methods suggested, is it actually defined as cheating? I have checked the rules of the site and can not find an appropriate reference. Maybe the cheating FAQs need a slight update to make it clear that such behaviour is not permitted.

When reported in the past Eric and company have forced forfeited both games at once. 

Black can't respond as that side would be defeated in both.

Black responds by playing the same checkmate in the game where he's playing white.

It isn't. That's what I meant when I said "Obviously this takes the fun out of the game, so this is not an option for someone interested in playing chess."

Two points:

1. So someone has tried this already? That person maybe should look for a different hobby.
2. It's good to have such a safeguard.
   

I'm having a hard time seeing what you are saying, you are playing two games at the same time versus a player, and on the game where you are white, you are just copying the moves he's doing as white. Is that what you are saying?

I'm really having a hard time understanding this, what if he refuses to go along with it, what if he plays another defence with black than you did?

Board 1, he's white.

1. e4 e5

2. Nf3 Nc6

3. Bc4 ...

Board 2, you are white.

1. e4 c5

And suddenly you have no plan.

What am I missing?

That's not an option.

Suppose you are black in the game with bold text, White in the game with italic text.

He plays 1.e4
You play 1.e4
He plays 1...c5
You play 1...c5
He plays 2.Nc6
You play 2.Nc6

Basically, you force him to play against himself.  He if mates you in one of the games, you get a mate in the other.

Yeah.  I agree with tricklev.  Wouldn't this require the other player to mimic your moves with the black pieces in game 2?  If he starts to go his own way this plan is useless right?  Why would a player, watching his opponent mimic their every move, decide to do the same in a second game against that same opponent.

As far as I can tell, you arent missing a thing.  The assumption seems to be that if I move e as an opening, that there is really only one response to it.  Then, if I continue making a specific series of moves, I can guarantee the setup of the board at some undetermined point in the future.  This is nonsense.

I have to agree with Tricklev, here.  The best response to someone trying this tactic is just to change it up a bit.. repond a bit differently.

 I think what you are missing is that you are assuming that black plays 1. ... e5 on board 1 BEFORE black plays his first move on board 2. The person playing this trick never makes their move first. It does work.   

To see how it is done check out the amazing video on this site - http://www.chess.com/free-videos?sortby=view_count&page=2

Derren Brown - not a strong chess player - beats a gaggle of chess masters using this technique.

I don't think it is cheating but it is bad sportsmanship if used in a competetive game on this site and probably Eric is right to stamp down on it (assuming he does).

It can be seen as a variation of fixing the game result, because the method implies that I cannot win both games.

You are missing the order in which the moves are played on the two boards. Just because it's you're turn, it does not mean you have to move. You can just wait and move later.

No, it's not just poor sportsmanship, it's cheating.

Yeah, I quickly realised what I missed, but yeah, I would assume that this definately constitutes cheating, and I'm going to go ahead and assume that if this was brought into the attention of the Admins they would make you forfeit the games, if not ban you.