It's the same on Chess.com - in unrated games, you can get help, use an engine, whatever.
Unless the rules surrounding this have changed in the past ~12 months, I'm pretty sure this isn't correct.
I was under the impression that cheating in unrated games was still against TOS, unless the opponent was aware assistance was being used and agreed before the game, in which case it is fine.
Unless the rules surrounding this have changed in the past ~12 months, I'm pretty sure this isn't correct.
I was under the impression that cheating in unrated games was still against TOS, unless the opponent was aware assistance was being used and agreed before the game, in which case it is fine.
Yes, according to the TOS, it has to be known that one (or both) are getting assistance. On LiChess, casual games means anything goes (they do not even check them).
If it looks like a cheat and acts like a cheat, it's either a duck or Hans Niemann.
cope!
Cymru am byth
ok
If it looks like a cheat and acts like a cheat, it's either a duck or Hans Niemann.
You're quackers.
Personally, I recognise that it is significant if someone plays 300 points stronger in a large sample of live relayed games against delayed ones. (And then, applying the scientific principle of testing, we then find he plays over 300 points stronger in the portion of Sinquefield 2022 that was live relayed).
There is no doubt that a professional chess player who has cheated for financial and personal benefit and has been caught twice is likely to try to disguise his cheating, but in order for it to be worth cheating, he can't fully disguise the boost to his results.