Is chess.com pay to win now?

Sort:
ComeHugMyKing

I just finished reviewing my last 5,000 losses (100 pages, 50/page) looking for account closures.

The average number of closures for the older 80 pages was 1.756 per page (3.51%).

Starting in May, the rate of account closures dropped steeply to 0.272/page (0.55%).

Perhaps there's only 1/6 the number of cheats on the site, but I'd guess not.

My next thought was it just takes time for cheaters to be detected, but the incidence of account closures dropped simultaneously with 3 other things and I don't believe in coincidence.

(1) I stopped receiving notifications that my cheat reports are being reviewed, despite submitting many.

(2) I stopped receiving notifications that I have been refunded rating, despite their being account closures within that period.

(3) Literally days before the decline in account closures, chess.com had some big news: https://www.chess.com/news/view/announcing-chesscom-verified

https://www.chess.com/news/view/treasure-chess

"Given that all verifications will receive extensive fair play checks, we believe that the verified system is the beginning of a new kind of security in online chess!"

Did they introduce a new kind of security or just dumb down the existing security?

Has anyone had a similar experience? What conclusions do you make? To me it feels like the site doesn't care if you cheat anymore unless it's against someone who opens their wallet, but I'm not verified so I can't test this.

justbefair

Hmm. Interesting observations. I am not sure we can take your individual experience and broaden it out to draw site-wide conclusions about cheating. 

The number of Fair Play closures  just reported for the first 5 months  of 2022 (116,354), was about twice that reported in the last 3 months of 2021 (59,656).  It looks like the number of Fair Play closures is increasing.  It certainly doesn't look like there was any slowdown in Fair Play closings.

You said that you just got into the Legends Club at the end of May. Presumably, you stopped needing to grind out wins.  That might have had an effect on who you were playing, starting when you advanced.

It also seems to me that accounts get closed for many reasons other than cheating.  In fact, abuse closures occur far more often than cheating. (As seen in the monthly/quarterly reports.) And many people close their own accounts.

How have you separated the types?

This is from a recent update last February for the last three months of 2021:

It looked like two-thirds of the accounts closed by site were for abuse. 

I haven't seen figures on self-closed accounts.

At any rate, it seems fair to say that most closures did not relate to cheating.

The recent report for the first 5 months of 2022 was just released:

 

The number of Fair Play closures ,116,354 for 5 months, was about twice that reported in the last 3 months of 2021 (59,656).  It looks like the number of Fair Play closures is increasing.  It certainly doesn't look like there was any slowdown in Fair Play closings.

At any rate, it seems clear that one can't conclude that an observed change in rate of closing on one account necessarily means there has been a change in site fair play policies. There could be many other reasons.

It does seem possible that the demands of adding players under the new verification system would divert some of that department's attention away from catching unverified cheaters.  However, it also seems possible that they anticipated the new demand and  had hired accordingly.

At any rate,  you made some interesting observations.  Perhaps other people will take the trouble to look at the rate of closures in their own accounts. 

This whole discussion should probably be moved to the Cheating Forum. However, I won't lock it unless and until people start posting names and games, effectively making accusations. 

heythreej
I’m not sure if you call it cheating but I’ve noticed how brand new accounts have been dominating in Blitz 3+0 tournaments with lower than expected rating for their wins. Winning the tournament with a rating of 780-870. When you check their stats and see they played like 30 Blitz games, you can assume those are all in the recent Blitz tournament, and their other style ratings would be like 400 or so. What would be the benefit of that, to have a brand new account and cheat to quickly get a higher rating or is it a bot?
justbefair
heythreej wrote:
I’m not sure if you call it cheating but I’ve noticed how brand new accounts have been dominating in Blitz 3+0 tournaments with lower than expected rating for their wins. Winning the tournament with a rating of 780-870. When you check their stats and see they played like 30 Blitz games, you can assume those are all in the recent Blitz tournament, and their other style ratings would be like 400 or so. What would be the benefit of that, to have a brand new account and cheat to quickly get a higher rating or is it a bot?

Yes.  Sometimes those players have a history of repeatedly winning tournaments and then sandbagging until their rating declines back below whatever threshold they want.  They are easy to spot and should be reported.  (Not here. Use the report button.)

NMRhino
I noticed I rarely vs cheaters as often now that I’m verified.
ForsookTheRook

#5 The site giving preference to verified members skews the rating system. I've decided not to renew my membership over this issue. I'm already a paying member and now I have to pay extra for cheat protection? Several words come to mind, none of which I can use in this post.

fireonpizza
ComeHugMyKing wrote:

I just finished reviewing my last 5,000 losses (100 pages, 50/page) looking for account closures.

The average number of closures for the older 80 pages was 1.756 per page (3.51%).

Starting in May, the rate of account closures dropped steeply to 0.272/page (0.55%).

Perhaps there's only 1/6 the number of cheats on the site, but I'd guess not.

My next thought was it just takes time for cheaters to be detected, but the incidence of account closures dropped simultaneously with 3 other things and I don't believe in coincidence.

(1) I stopped receiving notifications that my cheat reports are being reviewed, despite submitting many.

(2) I stopped receiving notifications that I have been refunded rating, despite their being account closures within that period.

(3) Literally days before the decline in account closures, chess.com had some big news: https://www.chess.com/news/view/announcing-chesscom-verified

https://www.chess.com/news/view/treasure-chess

"Given that all verifications will receive extensive fair play checks, we believe that the verified system is the beginning of a new kind of security in online chess!"

Did they introduce a new kind of security or just dumb down the existing security?

Has anyone had a similar experience? What conclusions do you make? To me it feels like the site doesn't care if you cheat anymore unless it's against someone who opens their wallet, but I'm not verified so I can't test this.

yes, its called greedy chess.com

ComeHugMyKing

justbefair wrote:
     "The number of Fair Play closures  just reported for the first 5 months  of 2022 (116,354), was about twice that reported in the last 3 months of 2021 (59,656).  It looks like the number of Fair Play closures is increasing.  It certainly doesn't look like there was any slowdown in Fair Play closings."

I think it speaks a lot that the reports got less transparent for the period discussed. On the other hand, I wasn't aware the reports existed at all so I can't really complain. Even so, a quarterly report is more transparency than I expected. The site gets credit for that.


justbefair wrote:
     "You said that you just got into the Legends Club at the end of May. Presumably, you stopped needing to grind out wins.  That might have had an effect on who you were playing, starting when you advanced."

I never mentioned I was in the legend club and I don't believe that had any impact on my selection of opponents. On the other hand, I hit a new peak in bullet and took a break to work on other time controls. I'm certain that had some effect on the kind of people I've played against, however I suspect longer time controls are more conducive to cheating, not less.


justbefair wrote:
     "It also seems to me that accounts get closed for many reasons other than cheating.  In fact, abuse closures occur far more often than cheating. (As seen in the monthly/quarterly reports.) And many people close their own accounts."

As a player, it makes little difference to my ego or my desire to continue playing if someone is using an engine, sandbagging, or smurfing. I did not discriminate: if it was closed, it got counted.


justbefair wrote:
     "This whole discussion should probably be moved to the Cheating Forum. However, I won't lock it unless and until people start posting names and games, effectively making accusations."

I'm grateful for the detailed response and the opportunity for others to voice their thoughts. You have my gratitude. Thanks again for sharing the reports.

justbefair
CooloutAC wrote:
 

 

I'm not sure if related,  but I have noticed alot of accounts for some reason were not playing on the site in May.  Then there is tons of new accounts created in June,  and many other accounts starting to play again mid june.   Maybe it doesn't mean anything, but it sure is curious.  Maybe its just now they are all on vacation and ready for summer.  no idea.

  But Danny Rensch unwittingly implied during the candidates coverage when talking about how Alireza was once banned, that they do take cheat reports from the higher rated, especially titled players more seriously then those reported by others.

How could you possibly notice who was playing? There are millions of active accounts.

Even if you are on 24/7, you can't possibly see more than a tiny fraction of what goes on here.

And I have seen them repeatedly say that they don't ban anyone just based on someone's opinion.  They run the tests.

I think it was more likely that he was saying that they take reports on titled players seriously. 

llama36

Yes, chess.com is pay to win.

Anyone reading this who has lost a game, you can win again by sending payments to @nmsalpg

llama36
justbefair wrote:
heythreej wrote:
I’m not sure if you call it cheating but I’ve noticed how brand new accounts have been dominating in Blitz 3+0 tournaments with lower than expected rating for their wins. Winning the tournament with a rating of 780-870. When you check their stats and see they played like 30 Blitz games, you can assume those are all in the recent Blitz tournament, and their other style ratings would be like 400 or so. What would be the benefit of that, to have a brand new account and cheat to quickly get a higher rating or is it a bot?

Yes.  Sometimes those players have a history of repeatedly winning tournaments and then sandbagging until their rating declines back below whatever threshold they want.  They are easy to spot and should be reported.  (Not here. Use the report button.)

They're so easy to spot that chess.com bans them 1 week after they win the tournament! Wow!

Vertwitch
Same I don’t get any message about games being reviewed it doesn’t seem to be working
not_cl0ud
ComeHugMyKing wrote:

Is chess.com Pay-to-Win now?

You don't need money to win a chess match happy.png

Vertwitch

But u need an engine to catch up the leaders of the leagues using engines like the leader of my division is using now the guy has like 30 wins in a row xD 

justbefair
Vertwitch wrote:

But u need an engine to catch up the leaders of the leagues using engines like the leader of my division is using now the guy has like 30 wins in a row xD 

Did you report that player?

justbefair
Vertwitch wrote:

But u need an engine to catch up the leaders of the leagues using engines like the leader of my division is using now the guy has like 30 wins in a row xD 

The leader of your division does not have 30 wins in a row.

fireonpizza
nMsALpg wrote:

Yes, chess.com is pay to win.

Anyone reading this who has lost a game, you can win again by sending payments to @nmsalpg

scam alert

piedraven

Serious question, how do you tell a sandbagger from someone who tilted?

I ask because I stupidly played when overtired this month and lost about 170 ELO points for a while.

Won them back now, but I dropped ridiculously low for a while. I went from being able to beat people in the low 500s to losing to people in the upper 200s...note to self, don't play when too tired to think.

HawaiiFi

I paid for a Diamond membership for one month. My elo went up by 200. I stopped paying. My elo went down by 300. Yes it's pay to win.