cheater's using progs...
Sort:
Cheaters are going to cheat for whatever their reasons. My main beef w/ it is that it takes away from the "human element" or the so called OTB effect. I joined chess sites to play others for the spirit of improvement and love of the game by either winning or losing to a person. If I wanted to play a computer I'd put chessmaster or fritz in instead. That's my main point. It's not so much as to witch hunt or point fingers that's missing the point of this post. I would like to get through to those who may be less than honest. And, if you think cheating doesn't goes on much, that's naive. In the big picture, sure! it's NO BIG DEAL. But chess isn't about points(as was mentioned), it isn't about winning at all cost, it's all about the LOVE OF THE GAME. Finis!
One point I would like to add is that if people are cheating regularly by using computers their rating would reflect this and win or lose it would be in relation to losing to a computer of that rating. So far since joining I have just put out open invitations for games, but if I was worried about people cheating I would just chose to play people of similar rating as if they were cheating they would have a huge rating.
I may be the only person accused of cheating by NOT using a computer in a chess game. I used to have a computer account (on the Internet Chess Club) that was labeled such, so your opponent knows he's playing a computer. The program played the ending so well, my opponent (rated around 2450) insisted a strong human had to be making the moves. He thought no computer could play the endgame that well.
Nov 13, 2007
0
#46
"I may be the only person accused of cheating by NOT using a computer in a chess game"
That's Irony.
Maybe you and IBM.
Its a mistake to assume those who cheat will always have high ratings, this isnt always the case. Some people may only cheat against certain opponents for example.
This may be a question to the administrators: Is it possible to run all the games played on Chess.com through one of the Chess engines, on a routine basis, and flag those who are suspected of using computer help? May be a future enhancement...
That would eliminate this tiresome topic for all the people...
It seems to me that not much is done on many sites concerning computer use/cheating. On pay sites the problem isnt any better, those who cheat pay the same as those who dont afterall and for a pay site to ban anyone isnt good for business.
HotFlow wrote:I bet even if you introduced a toss the coin competition, some idiot will come along and have go at hacking the server so the coin lands in his/her favour.
I'm sure that would be a really popular site 
i told you once before get rid of complainers ed
why are my comments being blacked out ed
Nov 13, 2007
0
#53
Reb wrote: It seems to me that not much is done on many sites concerning computer use/cheating. On pay sites the problem isnt any better, those who cheat pay the same as those who dont afterall and for a pay site to ban anyone isnt good for business.
I disagree. I see plenty of evidence that cheaters are caught and punished everywhere that I play, except FICS. I don't play at yahoo, of course. Of course it is in the interest of pay sites to ban cheater. Most people that are willing to pay to play chess with complete strangers demand that the games are fair. Banning the few paying cheaters is necessary to attract the majority that pay and don't cheat.
Of course, not all cheaters are caught, and some of the accused may be innocent.
I think that we worry more about cheating than we ought. Ratings mean nothing aside from a measure of improvement over time. There's not much point in testing the skill of my software covertly when there are so many open arenas for getting a better test, such as the engine room on playchess or the Ridderkerk tournaments.
Nov 13, 2007
0
#54
ColeNewcastle wrote: I may be the only person accused of cheating by NOT using a computer in a chess game. I used to have a computer account (on the Internet Chess Club) that was labeled such, so your opponent knows he's playing a computer. The program played the ending so well, my opponent (rated around 2450) insisted a strong human had to be making the moves. He thought no computer could play the endgame that well.
Your unusual experience suggests that cyborgs ought to be able to whip straight silicon. Alas, I'm not certain that the recent freestyle tournaments offer much support for this belief.
I see plenty of evidence that cheaters are caught and punished everywhere that I play, except FICS.
I don't know why you make an exception for FICS. FICS has banned cheaters in the past and take it very seriously. Go there and "finger computerabuse" for more information. I think they are actually good at determining cheaters there. You just have to submit your suspicions to the admins.
Nov 13, 2007
0
#56
Loomis wrote:
I see plenty of evidence that cheaters are caught and punished everywhere that I play, except FICS.
I don't know why you make an exception for FICS. FICS has banned cheaters in the past and take it very seriously. Go there and "finger computerabuse" for more information. I think they are actually good at determining cheaters there. You just have to submit your suspicions to the admins.
I could have been more clear with an accent on the word plenty. I know that FICS monitors cheating. In my experience, they are less effective than playchess and ICC. Most of my cheating suspicions there (and these have been few) have concerned not suspected engine use, but manipulation of the clocks. In discussions of this problem at FICS, which really is quite severe, several other users have been able to explain how it is done. It still baffles me that someone would go to that effort to get an edge in blitz.
As for turn-based sites: they all have forum threads like this one, and implement measures to enforce the rules.
Nov 13, 2007
0
#57
cheaters are a very important part of the gaming business whether we/some of us like it or not, cheaters are players of many things holders of twisted egos, they like high scores and they hate to lose to the more skilled player, cheaters go out there and buy anything which would allow them to have an edge over his opponents, they buy the best joy sticks, the most expensive mouses, the most expensive computer programs, they have paid accounts in most paid gaming sites...etc, cheater are as important to the gaming busines as drinker are to the business world, drinkers expend money all around as long as there is also a drink to buy (ofcourse there is also the cheap drinker who always seems to know how to get his "drinkon" without expending to much money), the point is that cheaters is a market to be exploited just like drinkers are, we the ones who are not cheaters are the ones who need to make up our minds and learn to stay away from cheaters as much as we can, chess cheating is everywhere now, no matter to which chess side you go, most websites allow the use of the DGT chess board, if the "cheater geniuses" haven't found a way to make that DGT thing into a cheating tool a bet nobody has
I think chess.com is the best idea to keep cheaters away in a long time, cheaters are so paranoid about cheating I bet they don't come here as much, they know everybody has access to the pgn file and evalution chess board, that is a cheater's worst nightmare!
note: can you imaging most cheaters playing correspondence chess?
I can't!
cheaters think they are the best/smartest players because in their minds all the best players are cheating which makes them believe they are the smartest because they are the smartest cheaters, that kind of mentality doesn't work when it comes to correspondence chess or sites like chess.com
how are they goint to be the smartest cheaters in a place where looking at pgn files is allowed?
most cheaters's mentality don't have a place in this site, this site is a slap in the face to cheaters
Nov 13, 2007
0
#58
The analogy between cheaters and drinkers fails because moderate consumption of alcohol is good for the user, and good for society. Moderate cheating is morally repugnant.
good players dont worry about rating but hw to win.... 4get the program just try to win... wining against a human is casual, u must be happy if ur opponent is using a program n u beating him up... so u win against pc thats a greater win.. so cheer up n just give your best....
"Your unusual experience suggests that cyborgs ought to be able to whip straight silicon. Alas, I'm not certain that the recent freestyle tournaments offer much support for this belief."
I'm certain a human-computer combination would be stronger than a computer at most time controls because: (1) In the endgame, I can often see a win before a computer and I can sometimes defeat computers in theoretically drawn positions, (2) in closed positions I've seen IMs immediately pick a strong move that a top engine took over 20 minutes to recognize as good, (3) strong engines use books in the opening designed by humans rather than being left to their own devices and those books help to improve their ratings.
Of course, this assumes the human is fairly strong, and I don't know how many ELO points these extra insights would actually bring to the table.
"If you suspect an opponent has used a computer, why not post their name and the game and let the community decide if you claim has any merit?"
Slander might be a good reason not to do that.