Well, it is a great Coincidence! He may also be cheating... its hard to say... I suggest you talk to the chess.com staff and discuss with them the matter..
Coincidence or cheating?
Sort:
That was Fritz in deed, too good. Ask the site admins about this.
Jul 4, 2009
0
#4
7 book moves, and 7 moves played out of book. I don't really think that is enough to accuse cheating. The only thing that is slightly suspicious is the Nb4 maneuver to allow ...f5. Seems fairly sophisticated for a player his level. All in all, the game is way too short to make and definitive conclusions.
Pretty sharp play for a 1309 . . . :o
Wait, I just looked him up! He joined July 4th, today. That means that he is still finding his true rating. He's only played two games. I believe that this means that he is a much stronger player than 1300 but he hasn't played enough games for that to be reflected in his rating. I now find it very unlikely that he was cheating; he simply was much stronger than 1300.
Jul 4, 2009
0
#7
it was all straaight forward and as your peices were so very badly placed just coincedence i think
turkey_12345act wrote:
Wait, I just looked him up! He joined July 4th, today. That means that he is still finding his true rating. He's only played two games. I believe that this means that he is a much stronger player than 1300 but he hasn't played enough games for that to be reflected in his rating. I now find it very unlikely that he was cheating; he simply was much stronger than 1300.
Ahh... i am now starting to agree with you a little...
Thanks for the info. I will try to play better next time! :)
Izjar wrote:
That was Fritz in deed, too good. Ask the site admins about this.
Fast mates are more of a hallmark of a sneaky player, not a computer program.
If playing against suspicious players bothers you, you can try an anti-computer line like the Mason Attack, Bird's opening, or some of Pecci's strategies against Fritz:
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessplayer?pid=105395
Niven42 wrote:
Izjar wrote:
That was Fritz in deed, too good. Ask the site admins about this.
Fast mates are more of a hallmark of a sneaky player, not a computer program.
If playing against suspicious players bothers you, you can try an anti-computer line like the Mason Attack, Bird's opening, or some of Pecci's strategies against Fritz:
wonderful idea
hes not cheeting.hes just good.He play 1650 lvele.some times ppl play better then ther rating
I think people on this site accuse of cheating too much. I understand that it really hurts when you lose a game. I hate it, but i must say I have been accused of cheating, and i dont care, because i know the truth. He played well, but you didnt play that well. And the game is very much a book opening. You fell for the old NxP trick, so that is your fault. He hasnt played enough to make an accurate assumption of how well he plays. Play against him again. Analyze again, THEN make the assumption.
It is inconcievable that so many coincidences can happen in a single game. For sure a case of cheating . Appropriate actions should be taken.
Jul 4, 2009
0
#15
I think it's wrong to accuse someone of cheating in a public forum. There is a Report Abuse button at the bottom of the page. It's the staff's job to sort that out.
I hope the OP is not listening to anyone who says that they cheated.
atomichicken wrote:
I hope the OP is not listening to anyone who says that they cheated.
A cheater can be caught by a cheater only. Can we say?
KAKROACH wrote:
atomichicken wrote:
I hope the OP is not listening to anyone who says that they cheated.
A cheater can be caught by a cheater only. Can we say?
Troll alert. No one feed this guy.
7...Nb4 is in Game Explorer on this site. It was played before. So it's a bit strange to say somebody is cheating based on that.
Incidentally, in that game, there followed 8.0-0 f5. In this game, white played 8.a3 (new move) f5 9.Bxf5 Bxf5 10.axb4 Bxb4 -- which is Rybka's first line! White was cheating! ;-) (it also looks pretty normal)
Then 11.Nxe5 looks a bit risky to me, 11...0-0 normal, 12.0-0 normal 12...Qd4... well, I wouldn't have thought of that 13.Re1? weakens f2 so that 13...Bxc2! is the obvious tactic we'd all have found had it been the daily puzzle.
So nothing really special happens in this game.
Also, this is a very well known opening variation. I know several people who claim they've "analyzed 4.Bc4? right down to a loss for white in all variations". That's probably hyperbole, but they've probably used engines on the extremely well known position after 7.Bxe4. Which means that even if he's found all these moves with an engine, as long as he did it before the game started, and wrote down or remembered his conclusions, it isn't cheating.
Jul 4, 2009
0
#20
Cheating in chess is an issue that Chess.com takes seriously. That said, it has minimal impact on the site and shouldn't be a concern for 99.9% of players. Unfortunately, there is much more paranoia about the topic than it actually deserves. Also, having several constant and redundant threads on the topic that circulate with the same questions and comments over and over again isn't helpful, and instead causes people to worry more than they need to. We have posted FAQs below that should address all questions on the topic. We have posted the Chess.com FAQs and policies here:
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/chesscom-policy-on-cheating?page=1
And a forum/group to discuss cheating here
http://www.chess.com/groups/home/cheating-forum
You can also contact us using the "report abuse" link found at the bottom of the chess.com pages
Thanks for helping keep Chess.com safe and friendly!
Hi everybody
I've played a game I lose badly (my fault, I didn't see tha checkmate).
I got surprised when i studied the game with the Fritz engine and every movement my opponent made was the reccomended one by the engine ... What would you do in my situation? IHave I to report?
EDIT : When I played against him he was 1309 rating