Another cheater thread

LOL

I'm trying to avoid the Name and Shame Game, so purposely I've provided no helpful details about the nature of the game.

I'm really concerned about the mechanics of reporting suspected cheating.

This is the first time I've suspected someone of cheating. I'm such a crap player than I don't think anyone has to resort to cheating to beat me.

Anyway, to give vague details, I was beating a much higher rated player than I, only to lose in the waning several moves of a lengthy game. When I reviewed the game on the computer he made a series of blunders (per computer) and by rights he should have lost the game.

Then all the rest of the moves were spot on per computer.

The person owns an incredible >10 game winning streak.

Maybe he isn't cheating. As I mentioned, I'm not very good and beating me ordinarilly shouldn't raise any suspicions, but this was just a bit fishy.

I'm content to turn this over to the powers that be, but I just couldn't figure out how to do it.

         A least RE-post that in,the "Help & Support" forum.

I'm quite sure I AM delusional. However, it doesn't mean he wasn't cheating.

Think about it.

Once I played a 31 move game where 29 moves were recommended by stockfish

1... Best move (Nf6) +0.17

2... Best move (e6) +0.32

3... Best move (d5) +0.37

4... Best move (Be7) +0.37

5... 2nd best move (0-0) +0.42

6... Inaccuarcy (Nbd7) +0.57

7... 2nd best move (c6) +0.34

8... 3rd best move (exd5) +0.57

9... 3rd best move (Re8) +0.56

10... Inaccuarcy (Nf8) +0.87

11... Inaccuarcy (h6) +0.35

12... Best move (Nh5) 0.00

13... 3rd best move (Nxf4) -0.41

14... Best move (Bd6) -0.42

15... Best move (Bxe5) -1.50

16... Best move (Rxe5) -1.50

17... 3rd best move (Qf6) -1.71

18... Best move (Bd7) -2.13

19... Best move (Qxe5) -2.22

20... 2nd best move (Qe3+) -2.42

21... Best move (Re8) -2.71

22... Mistake (Qd4) -2.85

23... Best move (Qb4) -3.27

24... Blunder (d4) -1.53

25... 2nd best move (c5) -1.44

26... 3rd best move (b6) -2.00

27... Best move (Bxa4) -4.85

28... 5th best move (g6) -5.79

29... 2nd best move (Re6) -4.30

30... Best move (c4) -6.26

31... Blunder (gxf5) =0.00

32... Blunder (Re5) +6.58

33... 2nd best move (Kh8) =0.00

34... Best move (Rxf5) =0.00

35... Best move (Rh5) =0.00

36... Blunder (Bc6) +7.92

37... Best move (Rg5) +9.79

38... Best move (hxg5) +8.61

39... Best move (Qe1+) =0.00

40... Best move (Qe2+) =0.00

41... Best move (Qe1) =0.00

I know what the game is. So I analzed it above with stock fish. to tired to do to end. :P sorry

He did. And she responded with a checkmate.

I'm dating a woman from Prague. I hope to have a Czech mate some day.

If that is the game, or most of it, it looks pretty normal to me.

Making a series of blunders doesn't necessarily mean someone should "by rights" lose the game. The thing is, the opponent has to take advantage of the blunders and not make any themselves.

As the quote goes, the victor of the game is the one to make the next to last mistake (aka the loser is the one that makes the last one).

That was my first favorite chess quote.

And I once played a game where 26/27 moves were the best or equal best (or very advantageous, when it +6 it doesn't really matter) with Houdini's suggestion. 1 move that missed from total perfection was missed mate in 2 in the middle of the game 

Wait you're not allowed to use engines on chess.com????

Hey, yourespammed I think 

I never do for I honestly cannot tell the difference between a good player and a cheater and I do not want to point the finger at someone when I am not reasonably sure. No offence intended but players of your and my ratings and skills do not have to worry too much about cheaters for they will be in a different league (2200+) pretty soon. I presume a player cheats because he/she wants to have high ratings and playing a 1415 or a 1950 will not help them much.

All of the quotes are spot on, of course. As I said, I'm not prepared to report this gent to Interpol, but I did think someone with a metioric rise in his ratings and an unbeaten streak of double digits in spite of making several blunders against an uberpatzer such as I probably deserved some staff scrutiny.

I have to play him again. I'm not prepared to block him, so we'll see how it goes.

Looked at purley logically, anyone cheating cheats mainly him, or hersel.  It is either childish or a sad way to feed ego as it is unlikely to improve play and would never be useful against a face to face opponent.  Deluded ability remains a delusion.  

Based on the game listed above, it doesn't look too out of the ordinary. In looking at the history, 60 games with no losses and 2 draws is a little more suspect but may not mean anything either.

I don't have time to look through other games but a person that is cheating isn't very likely to ever start losing once they are winning and won't likely blunder 3 times in the game. A 2000 rated player on the other hand, will potentially have that happen two or three times in the game, especially in complex positions; the score graph will go up and down, often switching between winning and losing as each player makes mistakes.

If you truly suspect it you can report the player: https://support.chess.com/customer/portal/emails/new

BTW, to an inveterate empiricist, can anyone produce evidence that low and mid-rated players are not prone to cheating? I see that tossed around, but I see no reason for it to be true.