I don't think anyone should take the games played on chess.com that seriously. I think it is a way to learn and improve their game. Anyone that uses a search engine only cheats themselves. The turn based chess allows a lot of time for each move. The games should be played at a high level. There is no money involved so lets just enjoy chess.
cheating on chess.com
Sort:
Nov 25, 2008
0
#83
I agree with TheGrobe. Just like eBay, the site is only as good as the amount of trust the users have in it.
I disagree with QinShiHuangdi. I think the quality of play on this site is higher than Yahoo, higher than Facebook, higher than FICS. It is probably 2nd to ICC, and only because they have a 15 yr head start. It is amazing the quality of features you can get once you start charging for your service.
Nov 25, 2008
0
#85
As far as mandelshtam is concerned, in my opinion he shouldn't be forced out (well done Erik!). It's very easy to take a hard stance on cheating, and to say that even if someone doesn't understand what they're doing they should be punished. It's also a fair way to look at it. The thing is, this is a website for playing chess on, not an international tournament that makes any difference to anything official. I personally pay for membership because I enjoy the site, and I think it's very well run, and I'm happy that I don't face cheaters every game. What I do find is that I play on here mostly as a stepping stone to learning new concepts in chess, giving me practice with openings, and slowly improving my rating. If I lose a game and go down a bit in rating, so what? I know roughly what my skill level is, and I also know when I'm improving because I can see exactly where I'm improving.
I find it sad that people would cheat on such a site, but it's to be expected. If you put any game online you'll get people who cheat at it, and those who deliberately do so should be banned with the biggest hammer possible, but those who genuinely have made a mistake, does it really make a difference to anyone if they're allowed to stay? The admins will still do as good a job of banning people who deliberately cheat, and at the end of the day you'll probably still be having fun with games. Just because mandelshtam doesn't get banned, doesn't mean that the site will suddenly be awash with cheaters offering the same excuse, but it is in the spirit of the site as a community that embraces people.
TheGrobe wrote:
QinShiHuangdi wrote:
i don't agree with cheating but alot of you are making comments like this is some sanctioned site. This is chess.com not the US Federation of Chess.com if you catch my drift... If FIDE or USCF had this type of site then cheaters beware but chess.com doesn't command that respect as of yet.
I don't think whether chess.com is officially sanctioned in some manner or not is really relevant. What is at stake is the ability for users to trust that they are here on a level playing field and to derive enjoyment out of using this site as a result. If cheating were rampant here then I suspect that interest from most users would quickly wane. For this reason, taking a strict stance against cheating is just good business for chess.com -- sanctioned or not.
ummm... If you would have read my post a couple of post earlier you would not have wasted your time typing this... cheating is wrong (I SAID THAT EARLIER) but what's Eric going to do? post a mod in in everyone's computer room. What you said I already said. Please...read all post before quoting me.
Nov 25, 2008
0
#87
Just out of curiosity... short of the member just admitting that s/he cheated with a program, how do you:
a. detect a chess computer (i.e. how can you tell that the player is using a program)?
b. how can you enforce a "no cheating" rule?
You can probably bet that playing a time control faster than 2 minutes (with or without increment) is clean. But you can use an engine in 5 0, or slower.
valmenchetti wrote:
I don't think anyone should take the games played on chess.com that seriously. I think it is a way to learn and improve their game. Anyone that uses a search engine only cheats themselves. The turn based chess allows a lot of time for each move. The games should be played at a high level. There is no money involved so lets just enjoy chess.
I agree with this guy except I pay to be here and i didn't know face book had chess. Oz... what are you saying? Can I get chess credibility from this site in the same way I could get it from sanctioned correspondence chess? CHeating is wrong it messes up play I AGREE with all that. Im just saying you guys are taking it a little to seriously. Now if Eric went to the Chess Federation and listed Chess.com as a club of soem sort you have a case but until then it's a chess web site like with some extra benny's.
I'm fairly new here but not to chess. If you use a engine running in the background to play let alone win than whats the point of playing.
I've read your posts and I don't feel I wasted my time at all. I disagree with the sentiment of both your post, which to me reads as though you feel being proactive about cheating is futile and that we should leave the cheaters to their empty victories secure in our moral superiority.
The problem with this sentiment is exactly what I was trying to highlight: the cheaters do not operate in a vacuum and as a result they have an impact on everyone who plays on this site. Erik and co would be remiss not to vigilantly protect all of their hard work and investment in this site against such a cancerous practice were it to become rampant (and trust me, if cheating were tolerated, I fully believe that it would quickly become the norm as non-cheaters would leave this site).
I trust that chess.com has very effective means of detecting cheaters that stop short of posting a mod in everyone's computer room, so I reject the notion that it is futile. I also fully understand and respect the need for complete non-disclosure of those processes.
I don't really see what all the hoopla is about. I'm here to practice and enjoy chess. If someone I'm playing makes some strong moves and refutes my ideas, I learn from it. If someone consults an engine and makes some strong moves and refutes my ideas, I learn from it. Whether the move idea originated in the person's brain or came from an engine, my experience of it is the same.
THawk wrote:
Just out of curiosity... short of the member just admitting that s/he cheated with a program, how do you:
a. detect a chess computer (i.e. how can you tell that the player is using a program)?
b. how can you enforce a "no cheating" rule?
You can probably bet that playing a time control faster than 2 minutes (with or without increment) is clean. But you can use an engine in 5 0, or slower.
As Erik's alluded to earlier in this thread Chess.com has a policy of non-disclosure when it comes to the means of detecting and dealing with cheaters. I'm sure that the reasons for this are to prevent cheaters from finding ways of combating these detection processes (security through obscurity of a sort). As a result I wouldn't anticipate the answers to your questions to be forthcoming.
i think a lot of the players use the seach engines does not bother me i just like goog strong games.
Nov 25, 2008
0
#94
QinShiHuangdi wrote:
TheGrobe wrote:
QinShiHuangdi wrote:
i don't agree with cheating but alot of you are making comments like this is some sanctioned site. This is chess.com not the US Federation of Chess.com if you catch my drift... If FIDE or USCF had this type of site then cheaters beware but chess.com doesn't command that respect as of yet.
I don't think whether chess.com is officially sanctioned in some manner or not is really relevant. What is at stake is the ability for users to trust that they are here on a level playing field and to derive enjoyment out of using this site as a result. If cheating were rampant here then I suspect that interest from most users would quickly wane. For this reason, taking a strict stance against cheating is just good business for chess.com -- sanctioned or not.
ummm... If you would have read my post a couple of post earlier you would not have wasted your time typing this... cheating is wrong (I SAID THAT EARLIER) but what's Eric going to do? post a mod in in everyone's computer room. What you said I already said. Please...read all post before quoting me.
Dude.... that's just not how things work. Welcome to the internet.
Nov 25, 2008
0
#95
TheGrobe wrote:
THawk wrote:
Just out of curiosity... short of the member just admitting that s/he cheated with a program, how do you:
a. detect a chess computer (i.e. how can you tell that the player is using a program)?
b. how can you enforce a "no cheating" rule?
You can probably bet that playing a time control faster than 2 minutes (with or without increment) is clean. But you can use an engine in 5 0, or slower.
As Erik's alluded to earlier in this thread Chess.com has a policy of non-disclosure when it comes to the means of detecting and dealing with cheaters. I'm sure that the reasons for this are to prevent cheaters from finding ways of combating these detection processes (security through obscurity of a sort). As a result I wouldn't anticipate the answers to your questions to be forthcoming.
Agreed. It just doesn't make sense for the staff to publicly discuss their internal (proprietary) strategies for detecting cheats. What does make sense is for them to lightly monitor the conversation, and maybe on the off chance we collectively come up with an idea they find useful, they can incorporate it into their strategy.
Remember that they spend a lot of time thinking about this, and dealing with this, and we just type the first thing that comes to our mind... :-)
I'll say it again. I don't use books or software because it's not going to help me in OTB games. For analyzing games afterwards, yes I use all resources. You only cheat yourself by not being able really enjoy it when you make a winning move that changes the game. You cheat yourself of the true thrill and excitement of winning a game honestly. Cheaters only cheat themselves!
Nov 25, 2008
0
#97
TheGrobe wrote:
THawk wrote:
Just out of curiosity... short of the member just admitting that s/he cheated with a program, how do you:
a. detect a chess computer (i.e. how can you tell that the player is using a program)?
b. how can you enforce a "no cheating" rule?
You can probably bet that playing a time control faster than 2 minutes (with or without increment) is clean. But you can use an engine in 5 0, or slower.
As Erik's alluded to earlier in this thread Chess.com has a policy of non-disclosure when it comes to the means of detecting and dealing with cheaters. I'm sure that the reasons for this are to prevent cheaters from finding ways of combating these detection processes (security through obscurity of a sort). As a result I wouldn't anticipate the answers to your questions to be forthcoming.
As long as they have a way, then I'm happy.
roeski51 wrote:
i think a lot of the players use the seach engines does not bother me i just like goog strong games.
SEARCH ENGINES !??!???!
Nov 25, 2008
0
#99
QinShiHuangdi wrote:
roeski51 wrote:
i think a lot of the players use the seach engines does not bother me i just like goog strong games.
SEARCH ENGINES !??!???!
yeah sure, you just google 'best move please!' and hit 'i feel lucky' :-)
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:
TheGrobe wrote:
THawk wrote:
...
...
Agreed. It just doesn't make sense for the staff to publicly discuss their internal (proprietary) strategies for detecting cheats. What does make sense is for them to lightly monitor the conversation, and maybe on the off chance we collectively come up with an idea they find useful, they can incorporate it into their strategy.
Remember that they spend a lot of time thinking about this, and dealing with this, and we just type the first thing that comes to our mind... :-)
In the spirit of that then, here's the first thing that comes to my mind:
Instead of chess.com performing the game analysis after games and only at the request of the user, perhaps (assuming the CPU cycles are available) each move could be engine analyzed in real time (i.e. as soon as it is made) to be used internally to give each player a text move to engine move correlation score.
Those with high correlations would be highly likely to be cheaters and subject to further investigation. As an added bonus, doing this would also eliminate the wait time for game analysis as these would no longer have to be performed post game as an on-demand batch, but rather would be waiting and ready to be requested as soon as the game is complete.
i did not ask mandelshtam to leave the site. he is leaving on his own accord. i let him know that he could stay if he agreed to follow the rules as he clearly is a strong player.
i'll vouch for ozzie any day. ;)