We do look for sandbaggers as it is not allowed on chess.com, and we have a system in place for catching these users.
I believe Chess.com moderators should look at the 700-1150 bullet rating.
Sort:
I played a few 30 second bullet games against players in this range and didn't find anything suspicious?
They were all slow and hung pieces frequently.
Deranged wrote:
I played a few 30 second bullet games against players in this range and didn't find anything suspicious?
They were all slow and hung pieces frequently.
Yes, roughly 2/3 of the games were curbstomps, but the other 1/3 were quite viscous, too viscous most often ending on the clock in an even position.
My friend said that they were playing very well in the super low range of bullet. I dropped my rating down few hundred points to check it out.
He was right. There's something not right going on in the bracket, and it was actually a brutal climb back out. The moment I passed 1200 again the games got a lot easier and will be back to 1400 shortly.
I think there's a lot of sandbaggers/smurfs and players using opening book automation at 800-1150, since everyone and there mother knew the book Scandavian as white all the way to the d5 pawn push, while people at 1600-1700 in rapid don't eve know that, yet everyone in bullet knows how to break white's book vs Scandavian to the d5 pawn push without even taking a split second to consider why those are the book moves?
People in rapid and classical time controls don't even respond that well at 1600-1700 nor that fast. So I would like to confirm that my friend is right, that something is god awful in that bracket and you should dedicate mods to police is for a few weeks.
I am glad to be back to my original bullet rating where people don't play perfect book openings.
Cheers.
btw I checked match histories on all the white players vs scandinavian and none of them ever played it as black or against it was white in their past 100 games.