Pretty obvious, but not all that surprising. It's trivially easy to cheat during online chess. Strangely, people will cheat to assuage their inherent feeling of inferiority. It explains a LOT of human behavior, not just here. I'm not sure what my dominant emotion is: anger, pity, or amusement. (In the meantime, I'm trying my best to respond to Ne5 !!!)
I think there can be two possibilities:
1. that person was responsible in formulating Chessmaster's algorithm; or
2. that person is cheating himself (at the end of the day, what does s/he learn or gain from it? higher rating?...well, s/he might have high rating at chess.com but gets beaten black and blue by a toddler in actual game). I don't know which is worse, cheating one's self or stupidity. Can you enlighten me please...
Another way of suspecting cheating is the "aimless" play and perfect tactical play of your opponent.
If your opponent is highly rated and claims to have a high elo but doesn't understand the themes of the position or play aimlessly (especially in a closed position) then I tend to be more suspecious than usual.
But as I said earlier in other post as far as my personal experience I encountered more honest chess players than a small and insignificant number of cheaters.
This thread brings back memories that make me shudder. Long ago -- I was once 20-0 in thumb-wrestling. Not surprisingly, talk began to swirl -- not the kind of talk that makes an undefeated thumb warrior very happy, at all. Rumors of thrown matches, otherworldly technique . . . a bionic thumb. Great unpleasantness, indeed.
Some of the world's foremost authorities in all things thumb-wrestling began to look into my string of victories. Video of the contests was scrutinized endlessly. Some used the Thumbmaster program to meticulously analyze every feint, every thrust, every devasting pin -- nothing untoward was discovered in any of the investigation. Fact was, my powerful digit was simply -- to use a chess analogy -- the Bobby Fischer of thumb-wrestling.
Sadly, the damage was done -- my integrity had been severely questioned, and the injury to my reputation was permanent. No opponent would accept a match with me. Endorsements were lost. Everywhere I went, there were snide comments. "Why don't you thumb a ride to Cheatsville." It was a nightmare.
I eventually was able to move forward with my life, but the entire episode left the bitterest of tastes in my mouth (and no, funny guy, not from sucking my thumb). Mine is a cautionary tale -- do not be so quick to cast aspersions on someone's integrity. People would probably realize this, if they'd pull their thumbs out of their . . .
PGP
Thanks for your input, Cleptomania.
I never had any intention of accusing anyone. I came upon a situation that aroused my suspicions and piqued my curiosity as to whether I could somehow make an infallible determination concerning that person - a personal challenge, not a public one. I wasn't sure what the limited computer analysis actually revealed, so I put the issue in a public forum and received a crash course in compter analysis. As a rule, I don't believe that worrying about cheaters is worth the paranoia and too much "protection" or surveillance might actually be worse than none at all. Still, as an academic exercise, I would find it interesting to learn the indicative signs that differentiate your opponent's moves as human or computer-generated.
now, may I have my wallet back?
Ha! Thanks for the response. I've been playing chess for decades, most of it stuck at a low class-A level, and knowing something about my own limitations, I don't think most amateurs are qualified to judge an issue like this. A lot of posters here are sure they have the answer, but I believe it is not so clear. Thanks for the interesting subjects to ponder.