Evaluations Wanted

Without going into specifics, here is a scenario I encountered and without giving my opinion, which will be tacitly obvious anyway, I would like to learn if my opinion is justified:

 

For unspecified reasons,  I had a curiosity about a certain recent member here and looked at that person's profile page,  blog page and chess page. I noticed on that person's chess page that of the less than 20 completed games that person played, they were all wins -  unusual, but not impossible by any means.  I examined each game individually and that while most of the opponents were decent players, they stood slighty less chance against that person than I would againt Tal if I were giving him Knight odds.

 

I wanted to confirm my appraisal, so I copied the pgns from the games against the 6 strongest opponents and sent them to a friend of mine for computer analysis.  She uses Chessmaster (version unknown) which has the capacity to analyze games in computer fashion.  I was hoping for a list of lines as critical juntctures whereas I could deduce if at any point any opponent ever missed an opportunity.   But in her reply, I found something even more intriguing.   Chessmaster lists how many times a moves agrees with what Chessmaster considers the best line and how many times Chessmaster disagrees with a certain move (which I take to mean, that it's an inferior move according to Chessmaster).   In 5 of the 6 games,  Chessmaster aggreed with that person's moves 100% of the time and disagreed 0%.  One of these games lasted 37 moves  while the others lasted slightly less.   In one game it disagreed with 1 move.  I looked at that move,  and to be honest,  I liked the text move better than Chessmaster's choice.

 

Based on this information. what would be a reasonable conclusion?

I think the conclusion must be that you should tell Erik

he's a f****** cheater

a) cheating

b) cheating

c) cheating

d) all of the above 

To Rael's list, I would also add the following:

e) that person is an android.... that is cheating.

While this person is clearly like-minded to a computer and may be polite in pointing out his style of play to opponents, Chess is always chess and anything can happen.

 

While it is entirely likely that his style of play has evolved from hours of computer shess or simply from inputing his moves into a computer and copying them, the person has ruined their own taste of chess.

 When I pull out the wooden peices and offer a game over bagels and beverages, that person will either embarrasss himself for not having access to a computer or he will amaze by having memorized every move the computer might do.

The person may be overly logic bound or boring to the extreme in copying the computer, but all that suffers is my opinion of him since I personally value birllient or creative play. 

well i dont know about the conclusion, but i do know that the 'agreement %' stat on chessmaster is pretty meaningless.  My rating is 1382 and even i have acheived several games with 100% agreement %, i think mostly they were games i lost.  As far as the statistic is concerned i think it counts as 'agreed' if the move is within a certain points score of what chessmaster would play, so dont be tricked into thinking that the game was actually played as chessmaster would have played it.  Also, some of imo my better games have really bad agreement percentages, for example one game where i was a queen for rook up with connected passed pawns, i just started pushing the pawns for the simple win, but every move was disagreed with because chessmaster had mate in 12 or something.  Your suspicions are likely correct from your description, but just be careful with the 'agreement %' thing. 

  Sounds highly suspect. A person learning from a computer doesn't always follow the computer lines to a tune of 100%. Plus he might be using an older/newer copy of the software, hence the 1 difference in the 6 games.
  He should be expelled from the site, or forced to tell his advarsarys that he will be using a comp against them and all game played with him will be unrated practice games.

 

I can't find "that person" anywhere on the site. Are you sure that's their username, or did erik already ban him or her?

 

 

 

Sorry. I tried to resist.

In my limited time here, it seems that there really isn't much cheating going on. All of my opponents have made some very human moves. I'm sure that cheaters do exist, but there isn't exactly a deluge.

Thanks. I don't really know anything about Chessmaster's analysis feature other than the results given to me. Would you say 99.99% agreement in 6 games is indicative of something, or just a coincidence?  I noticed that the one move Chessmaster didn't agree with was at least as strong as Chessmaster's given line.

I'm not complaining about cheating.  I was curious about that person (for Rael's sake, let's assume that person is an aka), and in the course of things, I became curious about the value of a computer analysis to confirm something I had already suspected through casual analysis.

it would appear just that this person is using some sort of chessmaster or rybka to play his or her games for him or her in the profile. i would also say that this person is afraid to lose and might even possibly think that they are better because of it but in reality using an ai doesnt help a  bit it just underminds the whole concept of a friendly game. this case should be carefully examined and brought to the attention of ERIK for his thoughts.

For unspecified reasons, I had a curiosity about a certain recent member.. That is a really a nice opening for Mystery Book.

I suggest we form a mob with all players currently online. I can bring the kindling, if someone else can take care of the matches.

I like how everybody wants to call the Sheriff (Erik).  Call the Dobermans and don’t forget to bring your children and in-laws. Pleeease give me a break with the hypocrisy, please !

Latitude, what hypocrisy are you getting on about? My hypocrisy detector is in really good working order (just got it back from the shop), and the needle is still. So... ?

there is a strong possibility of cheating... If 100% of his moves is accidentally the same that of chessmaster or other chess softwares, it will only be possible if he is a GM or IM or a strong player but its still a small possibility of his moves is equal to that of the software . because in  computers is 100% tactical and Human's are sometimes tactical and strategical and sometimes mixed...

in one of his games you said only one move chessmaster disagrees maybe he used a another software... there is a strong possibility of cheating here...

make a plan in order to know if he is cheating or not...

 

 

If Chessmaster agrees with 99.99999% of that member's moves, then it seems to me that he is using a computer program to either augment or replace his analysis.

when I browse through the all members here on this site I have seen that there are some players who have  100% winnings... I don't know if they are cheating or what but they could be...