ELO Gatekeepers

@FireWalkWM btw, accuracy doesn't mean anything, it's more of an ego boost, if you get a master to review a game you played at the 1000 level and a game between 2 2000s they could see the difference clearly

You are not just wrong. This silly patchwork, where not a single sentence is true, deserves medicine.

We don't talk about 2000 level players here. It's maybe a side topic. We talk about two 1000 elo players where honest player play like ~1000, but elo gatekeeper play like 1700+

No CMS and nms are around 2400 (with a range of more 2200-2600)

If you see this comment you are cursed unless you post this on 3 other forums (don’t blame me I didn’t start it)

Oh whow that sounds really bad.

No clue why anyone would do that in the first place, but oh well.

But shouldnt you be able to bypass this rather easily ? Just dont play against someone who plays suspiciously a second time ?

Sure you will still get a small effect, but it shouldnt be too bad ?

The temptation for some players to cheat in 30min/1h games is probably quite high.

This is why I tend to stick to blitz or bullet games, as engine assistance is more easily recognizable in those time controls.

You might want to try playing those long games unrated - as I imagine there's far less motivation for players to cheat in an unrated game. Or play against opponents whom you already know and trust to be legitimate.

There is that, but there is the argument for the opposite case as well. Cheaters are usually low effort people. It takes more time to win 60|0 games. Now put yourself in shoes of someone who is basically not playing the game, but just sits there and decides which computer move he will choose, perhaps only adding some of his moves to try to fool the system. He could be waiting for some time until that win is achieved. That must be very boring.

At the same time he can win at least 3 or 4 10|0 games or shorter.

On your level however, that is not really applicable, because you wouldn't even be able to get a match with someone who is 2400 (unless you set up a game with someone manually). I rarely play 60|0 because there were a handful of people above 1 600 playing those games. There are of course some people who cheat, but In my experience in longer games perhaps it occurred once in 20-30 games, maybe even rarer than that. Of course there were instances where I get 2 in a row and then nobody for a long time.

In any case, it is not that bad situation in 60|0 games, at least in my experience. But I accept that it is more annoying when you inevitably encounter a cheater while playing a game for an hour or 2.

There is one thing you can do to decrease the odds of cheating as well, if you have a membership. As these people wait for some time to get a game, you go on that graph with challenges. Their challenge is usually up there for at least a minute, sometimes significantly longer, you can view the profile quickly and decide how likely is that you will get a fair game.

With shorter games you can't really do that, as the challenge will be there for several seconds usually, so you get what you get.

As for your level, I bet that cheating is more of a problem however. I noticed that even on speedruns of some masters. Once they hit 2 200 or so, bigger percentage of people are getting caught. And I would say that the better the player is, he is potentially the better cheater.

It is much easier to caught someone who sees that en passant is the best move but plays the second choice because he doesn't know what en passant is, than some GM that will cheat once or twice in 3 games or so.

What was exactly the reason to revive this long dead thread? And replying to a guy who was probably muted 3 weeks ago?

Because people have reacted to my post and I had not answered them yet ?

I'm not daily on this site, sorry.

Are you a chesscom employee? If so, then your presence here is clear. If not, then what is your motivation for frequently appearing and tuning people that it's a "long dead thread"? You haven't played with live people here for years, but only test various chess bots, which is often done by chesscom employees. You are not in a 1000 rating environment and have not played Rapid - how can you talk about a movie you haven't seen? 
Feeding guys with fair play up to level ~1000, then making this huge mass of people play against elo gatekeepers (stockfish junkies) to be disappointed and become the same, but save small pool of GMs and chess celebrities and really good players from 2000+ up is a great business strategy. By the way, an Elo gatekeeper is a better and more persistent customer than an honest person.

The mere concept of "Elo gatekeepers" is a completely unhinged conspiracy theory. The idea that a huge pool of players conspire just to keep you from going up above 1000 is exactly as ridiculous as it sounds.

You didn't answer - are you or are you not a chesscom employee?  
A huge pool of players hide (or "conspire" - if you like this better) their addiction to the engine because officially it's illegal here. This has nothing to do with me. This has to do with their addiction, the fact that no one will admit to this addiction and the fact that this addiction is very profitable from a site's business point of view.

Hmmm, that's just what a person at the heart of a grand conspiracy would say! I'm now convinced

That's a good point; I hadn't considered that.

Though I believe there's a good possibility that a player might play most of the moves in a long game ... but then find himself stumped on one particular move, and might then take a moment to "blunder check" with an engine, just to be sure that his idea works ... "I'm not copying the engine," he might say, "I just wanted to glance at it to make sure I'm not losing ..."

Which is still 100% cheating, either way (whether its many moves or even just one) ... but I could also see it happening quite easily, unfortunately.

Maybe joining one of the online chess clubs and playing against fellow members there would be a smart idea. I'm sure there are a lot of players who are looking for others to play longer games with.

Again, I repeat:

Its possible that such cheaters exist.

But if they do, you can easily avoid them by always changing your opponent. Or at least changing your opponent once you notice suspicious gameplay.

I dont know what the rate of cheaters is, but even if it was as high as 10%, they cannot keep you from climbing.

Of course it is cheating. What you said can happen, but that can happen in any time control. It is not limited to long games. Even in blitz a cheater might do it (there it might even be more devastating, as if you spend a minute on something and cheater spends a few seconds, a third of your time is gone, and that is an even bigger advantage in such a short game).

That being said, I feel they catch those smarter cheaters as well, somewhat later on average. It is not easy for them to know what seems natural what doesn't, unless it is a very strong player who is cheating.

Imagine some 800 (realistical rating) rated person trying to pick a moment to cheat. That would be someone playing badly then suddenly find something insane, and he wouldn't understand how crazy that was. It would be as if a toddler is trying to prove to you that he invented a telephone or something.

And the longer they do this, I feel that adds up and they get banned. Plus ego betrays everyone, even strong GMs. Just take that bathroom scandal that happened recently. The guy is top 100 player and cheated in a laughable way. Or Petrosian online a few years ago. If they catch 2 600 OTB GMs who actually knows a lot about chess, only a small minority goes through cracks.

Some will, it is inevitable, but if we are too afraid of cheaters, we can kiss online chess goodbye. Maybe I am naïve but I don't think we are there yet.

It would be really difficult for them to analyze every game on their servers. There are just too many people for such a thing, so it is understandable.

Exactly, long story short, you shouldn't worry too much, it will happen, but not in a significant enough way to stop your improvement if that is what you seek.

As for you not reporting, it is still fine, someone eventually will. Some people report even when everything is fine, and it is enough for one person to report a person, for them to investigate that profile.

Elogate