cheating on chess.com

The cheater I talked about before played me at 3 0.

On Yahoo!, I believe I have played many cheaters at 3 0, and some even at 1 2. I think adept cheaters can bounce between a chess engine and their browser at a rate of about 3 seconds per move. So they will win if their chess engine grinds out a win within 60 moves.

On Yahoo!, I have also seen cheaters hook up a chess engine directly to the Yahoo! chess interface, and play 1 0 games so fast that after 20 moves they have used only 5 seconds on the clock.

---

You would not win a 10 game match 10:0 against someone 365 pts lower than you. Maybe 7.5-2.5 or if you're lucky 8-2.

---

I think that chess.com should implement this feature and should no longer concern themselves about cheaters. They catch nobody after all.

---

Just to clarify: You think chess.com should implement a feature allowing a chess engine to hook up directly to the chess.com chess interface, and you think that chess.com should not concern themselves about cheaters because chess.com catches nobody at all, right?

---

 I can understand the sarcasm but you'll find quite  a few accounts that have been banned for cheating where it was obvious engine use, in addition there were many accounts that suddenly closed themselves having risen to high in the ratings list.  So a bit unfair to say they catch nobody.  Perhaps they should have a board of shame instead of keeping it low profile.  On the other hand that might add to the hysteria.

Yes David! You know, I saw the match between Kramnik and Anand and the advantage was always fluctuating. Here, there are people who play perfectly, so well that Anand would have no chance against them!! You can see how their advantage is ALWAYS increasing. I reported them to chess.com and nothing happened. So, if an agreement percentage of 80% of the UNFORCED moves is not cheating, then nothing is cheating. The second thing I am surprised is the level of the players here compared to ICC. A player at 1400 would be about 1800 on ICC. How come all the smart guys come to chess.com and all the patzers go to ICC?

maybe we should lock this

---

I have never used a chess program for help, not even for opening's

---

It amazes me that some people still dont get it! i dont care about 'other' sites, i dont care whether you are allowede to have rybka , fritz and shredder making your moves for you on 'other ' sites! i dont care if you are allowed to have a personal link up to Garry Kasparov during games on 'other' sites! this is chess.com and the rules are clear and there for all to see....the use of engines is NOT ALLOWED, simple! so dont keep saying 'well its ok because they do it elsewhere' or 'you cant find out if only cheat now and again' JUST FOLLOW THE RULES! paying members like myself expect that for their money they can have a least a little 'piece of mind' that they are playing human opponents on here, if i wanted to play fritz or rybka, i would do it offline....also, it really annoys me, that my goal rating on here is 2000, a few months back i acheived it, only for a few games, thjen back down to 1900 where i have been for ages, but i love the challenge of trying to get back to 2000 by using my brain! and if i was like some of the posters in this thread, i would have 2400 in no time, but i would rather it take me 6 months or longer to acheive 2000 again, than turn to these devious and dishonest tactics,. Some of you guys make me sick! (only a few of you) :-)

---

Maybe lock it only after nothing new gets said for a while...

---

Wow this post is just nonsense. 

First of all in the world championship match between Kramnik and Anand I'm pretty sure each player didn't have days to make each move.  Also, I'm pretty sure they didn't sneak an opportunity when the cameras were off-guard, the audience was looking elsewhere and their opponent was off in the bathroom to move the pieces around the board to analyze different lines.  Yes what I'm trying to say is that they weren't playing correspondence chess meaning their accuracy was OF COURSE less precise than someone who had a huge amount of analysis tools at their disposal for hours and hours on end.  That is why high-level correspondence play is qualitatively better than OTB play.

As for your Chess.com vs. ICC comparison, you do realize there is no turn-based chess going on at ICC, right?  So once again you have the dilemma of comparing OTB style chess ratings at ICC to correspondence  ratings here at chess.com which at best is extremely short-sighted and at worst... well... whatever.

Unless of course you were comparing Chess.com's Live Chess ratings with those over at ICC?  In that case if you are saying that the Live players here are better than those at ICC that would obviously mean you haven't played at ICC.  In Quick Chess here at any given time I enter the server I'm usually in the top 5 of say 600 people logged on at the time.  Then if I hop over to ICC I'm generally not even in the vicinity of the top blitzers playing, and am overall ranked probably about 5,000th.  This is due to the fact that at any given time there are a very large amount of Grand Masters, International Masters and Fide Masters destroying everyone.

So really dude your post is nonsense it feels like you are just making stuff up, which if you are then I guess I just took the bait.

---

Yea I agree you probably shouldn't play, you were so scared of losing you decided to comfort yourself in the warm accepting arms of Fritz.  You trusted your silicon friend to envelope your fragile ego in it's metallic embrace so no chess player could harm you.  Sounds like a bit of a human - computer romance novel.   Sad state of affairs there bud, but I'm still glad you are back. 

If I were a betting man I'd guess you'll get beat by some foe you deem "unworthy" which appears to be almost everyone according to your warped viewpoint and then go on another Fritz rampage to make yourself feel better.  I hope I'm wrong though, good luck!

Being relatively new to playing chess on line via this site i would like to add that the people i,ve met are in general great honest people, quite happy to pass on tips even during a game so if you suspect anyone of "cheating" then just dont play them because there are enough people on this site who play for the love of the game of chess whatever level and from all over the world, if people use computers, let them, live is to short to worry,happy chessing,  MICK  

Oh, I thought this thread was going to be about the time I almost ran away with this really hot, red pawn I met this one time.

It happened innocently enough, I was just strolling along in the aisles of the internet, daydreaming really. And there she was, so new and different – I couldn’t help myself, there was something illicit about it, browsing her pages, seeing what her threads were saying. One thing led to another and I found myself at the sign up page, about to take the plunge. My mouse quivered over the link, my eyes closed…

But I couldn't do it. Not to you, no. I pulled away at the last minute, and got out of there with a hasty alt-F4. Just as I was about to cost it all, I realized that she could never compare to you.

She’s just some hussy with no substance, and my heart belongs here, with you, at home.

---

I know you were being sarcastic but I actually think chess.com should expand into the Freestyle arena.  The Freestyle community is very hungry for a place to play outside of Playchess.  The Infinity project has pretty much flopped or at least stalled. 

I realize that people are hysterical about this subject but Freestyle/Advanced Chess and chess played by the ICCF rules is actually fun to play and results in extremely high quality chess.  The best Freestyle players don't just blindly accept what the engine tells them -- they use the engine to confirm ideas that support the strategic objective.  A strong Freestyle team with a skilled centaur will destroy any engine-only player.  It's commonly accepted that the best freestyle players play at a level about 100-150 Elo higher than their engine rating.  Learning to integrate human chess knowledge with the knowledge received from chess engines is a skill like any other skill and there are legions of players out there who enjoy playing that kind of chess.

This topic is all very disturbing to me. The fun of playing chess on this site is interacting with another PERSON not a machine. It does not help anyone's growth chess wise to use a computer program to seek out the next move. That is what the challenge is: to seek out the next move using your own brain and hopefully to gradually improve your skill.

Now, this may sound crazy, but if some people are using computers to tell them the next move to make on their unknowing opponents, then I suggest we have two types of matches:

(1) Folks using computers against other folks using computers. (who would win? Rybka, Fritz, Shredder, or whatever? or would  it be who is more able and more on top of the software to use it against another person using their computers and software. Doesn't sound like too much fun. No thinking involved, only computer and software skill. But to each his own.)

(2) Those of us who want to play chess with another person using our brains and having a good time competing, even though we blunder and struggle to learn.

My thoughts.

stwils

I think wikipedia sums it up even better:

It has been stressed that the strength of an Advanced Chess player does not come from any of the components of the human-computer team, but rather from the symbiosis of the two. This means that, even if a human chess player is stronger than the computer program he is using, he will be able to increase his playing strength even further with good Advanced Chess play, and likewise, if a human player is weaker than the computer program he is using, he will still be able to play with a strength that is even greater than that of the computer. The strength of an Advanced Chess player lies in the combination of the computer's tactical accuracy and the human's creativity and sagacity, provided that both team components do possess these qualities.

The individual strengths of a computer chess program lie in:

• being able to calculate at a fantastic speed - on an average PC of today, a chess program is able to calculate a few million positions per second, making it tactically superior to any human in complex tactical positions;
• having access to a database of millions of tried and thoroughly tested opening moves and variations, with the ability to retrieve information from such a database very quickly, and to store such a database on hardware resources available to most modern PCs;
• having built-in tablebases for endgames, allowing the program to play perfect chess in certain endgames.

The individual strengths of a human chess player lie in:

•  the intuitive ability to construct meaningful long-term strategic plans which even the fastest PCs cannot foresee;
• being able to quickly discriminate meaningful moves from the meaningless, without wasting time on deeply calculating the combinations which can be deemed meaningless at first sight;
• being able to critically judge and analyze a chess game, plan, opening or endgame.

In short, a computer program is tactically superior, whereas a human chess player is strategically superior, making the combination of the two a completely superior chess player.

Yea but the thing about these "advanced players" is that they absolutely suck at chess if they don't have a computer to help them.  Not in all cases of course, but in most of them.  This security blanket of assistance is what attracts a majority of players to "advanced" chess.

On the last site I used to play at which was a non-program using turn-based site we had our top players challenge one of the most popular "freestyle chess" sites on the web.  The rules were to play traditonal correspondence chess without the use of computer assistance.  Well not only did our players absolutely wipe the floor with their players, but the entire time they were whining incessantly about not being able to use their programs.  It was pathetic. Most of the other site's "advanced" top players were no better than way below average in chess skill.  That is the biggest demographic attracted by "advanced chess".  Mediocre players who are tired of losing and the occasional strong player like the guy who's been posting in this thread who gets overcome with high amounts of paranoia and strangled by his misguided ego.  That is who generally flocks to this type of chess.

While I agree that the symbiosis of a player and a program is very real at the end of the day minus the program most of these players are the equivalent of lost puppies on the chess board.

---

wHAT HE SAID! *APPLAUSE*