cheating on chess.com

yeah i'm not quite understanding the whole argument about how computers help one with their chess skills during a game. i don't see how there is a reason for this. play the game, then use the computer afterwards and you're learning just as much. there is no reason why it has to be used during a game (especially against someone who is unaware of it being used).

you can still reach that level of "greatness" that one reaches when combining the human brain and a computer in chess, and this way you're not cheating anyone.

I think you actually learn MORE if you use the computer before and after the game, rather than during the game.

If you use it during the game, I'd think there would be a huge temptation to just do what the computer said, instead of applying your brain at all.

You can learn a lot before a game with the computer. For example, in my match against EnGliSHCheSsPlAy, I researched games he had played, found one where he won because of his opponent's blunder in the opening, and extensively analyzed that position with the help of Rybka before the first move. I certainly learned a lot about those kinds of positions. (Fortunately, he walked into that line. Unfortunately, he blundered a piece early so I was not able to test my lines. http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=8818123)

And, of course, you can learn a lot analyzing games afterward, such as with chess.com's Analysis feature.

 you are quite correct. i was merely just trying to argue against the position that playing with a computer makes you a much better player (by helping you analyze moves - not by simply doing whatever the computer tells you). that argument holds after the game as well (and like you said, to an even greater degree).

rajlich:  you are making some extraordinary claims here

The players at the top though are much more sophisticated.  Often they played chess over-the-board in the past, and show an impressive knowledge of opening, middlegame and endgame theory.  Even without engines, they would be formidable opponents, but with the engine by their side, they are virtually unbeatable.  Some of them try to give back to the community by sharing their insights, posting annotated games, forming groups or participating in vote chess matches.  If you are serious about improving, you might want to message one of them, or even challenge them to a game, and I think you'll find them by and large quite open and knowledgable.

How do you know how many of the top players are using engines? You earlier claim to have spoken to many of them (engine users) but perhaps you meant on the "other servers".  You seem quite complimentary, which is nice and you aslo mention that may of these top players would be string anyway and that they play unusual openings or sacrificial lines and also sometimes share in vote games and game annotations and form groups. That could describe me in many ways ahem.. I'm just wondering if you really have evidence or you're just making an educated guess.  By the way I can see some evidence to support your view.  I also see evidence of some unsophisticated engine users here.  But I also don't feel thet there are as many as people think, and also I notice them disappearing either by being banned or just resigning their games and fading into the sunset.

You've only been a member for one day so your survey has been remarkable :-)

Oh. In other words, you have no idea whether your claim is correct for chess.com.

FYI, I do not fit either of your profiles. When I play "correspondence" chess here, I tend to play lines that I am most comfortable with based on decades of play. I prefer semi-closed positions with lots of pieces, though I do seem to be pretty good at endings.

i hate cheaters!! they are theives. they try to get something they don't deserve. called the winner!!! 

Fair enough Rajlich, you are generalising from your long experience on other sites...I can't comment as I am relatively new to online correspondence. Frankly I see more obvious blind style engine use than the style you speak of (I see a few people who play unusual openings and sac lines but they are in the minority and I wouldn't think they are engine types) I have played a number of almost infallible players who can't explain where I went wrong and one who clearly didn't understand the principle of the opposition and made me play a lot of moves back and forth to the queening square with my king...

Of the titled players I've played here most didn't play closed games in fact, they played according to their styles.  What I have noticed is that many strong otb players (not just titled) are relatively poor at correspondence..some recognise that they can't maintain the interest or summon up the adrenaline rush that otb gives, I chatted to one FM about this years ago and he said he couldn't muster up interest in correspondence; one or two accuse all and sundry of engine use, including one who dropped a rook like a beginner might. 

I noticed that even today a couple of guys were banned, so I feel chess.com are doing their best, and I enjoy being here. I have never reported anyone yet myself (the Irish don't like informers)  but a lot of the people I suspected are no longer around.

Welcome to chess.com Vasik. Don't spend too much time here, you need to get cracking on Rybka 4 ;) .

quotes from rajlich: mm78 comments in bold

Anyway, I am in no way trying to condemn chess.com

That much is clear but I think you are basing your assumptions on a statistically insignificant sample yet you talk about a *a lot* from *quite a few* and *very much*

or claim that it is worse than other servers in the number of engine users.  I do know, and have played chess with quite a few people who are members here, and they strike me as very much like the people I have played with on other sites. 

A lot of them do use engines, play engine lines, fumble in areas where engines are weak, and play very strongly in areas where engines are strong.  I do object to this idea of "punishing" them.  In most cases, they believe they are doing nothing wrong, and you have to admit as offenses go this is pretty minor. 

Actually no, it's pretty major given that the rules say no use.

I do think if you could get away from judging them, and be more realistic about how widepread the actual use is, that some kind of compromise could be worked out where they wouldn't have to hide, but they could be set off from the non-users, so that people who did not want to play with them wouldn't have to.

I suppose this is like what I understand the official line is on the ICCF?

Your points are reasonable enough in one sense and you seem a nice guy, but it can't be right that we have people shooting to the top of the lists, winning tournaments etc and wasting people's time when they truly have no ability??  Your point about the guys who can actually play and are willing to share surely only applies to a relatively small population?

ok rajlich, this other thread on the same subject shows that you clearly were a member here before today, talk of COT etc. 

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/computers-in-correspondence-chess

MM78, that other thread was posted 11/28/2008.

Why do you object to punishing people who deliberately break the rules?

my point was that he knew all about circle of trust etc, surely he must have been a member before.  In fairness I'm not sure how much a non member can access in terms of games/forums etc :-)

Well, why not stick to that point, instead of undermining the concept of rules?

Rajlich the above quote is where I believe you lost all credibility, at least with me.  I left Yahoo chess years ago after it had gotten overrun by cheaters and became the cesspool of internet chess.  I'm guessing you were one of these "misunderstood" players who decided you needed an engine to play others because your own brain couldn't hack it.  Anyway to refer to the majority of Yahoo cheaters as closet-case underground advanced freestylers just showcases your denial of the real reasons behind most cheating on internet chess servers.  It also showcases your denial about your own cheating. 

There really are quite a few sites that deal with this "advanced freestyle awesomeness" chess that you regard so highly, why not just join one or all of them and be done with it?  You got caught using a program here and got your account removed, it's time to drop it.

I, for one, would be sadly dissapointed, and would find another chess site if this rule were changed at chess.com.

I would leave as well.  I will also leave if it can shown that many of the top players here are indeed cheating.  I have a computer I can play against.

I would not go quite that far -- it is sufficient for me to know that cheating is not condoned, and is proactively combatted here.  How effective that enforcement is is actually besides the point for me.

Also, as I've said before, I likely don't match up against players of such a calibre that they could conceivably be among these alleged "centaurs" anyway.