The second I see him write "I have used an engine on chess.com" I know that he's a deranged and idiotic scumbag who's not worth listening to or reading, who has nothing valid to input or say, I hope he leaves chess.com and rots in cheating hell. To answer your question, I imagine it is easy to cheat if people really want to, unfortunately there's nothing we can do about this. I think most players are honest.
Is it really that easy?
Sort:
Pocket Fritz? must be some years back.. however, if you run chess software with only some seconds left for think, no whonder that you reach significantly worse results
lol why does someone want to watch other people playing against an engine?
Apr 14, 2015
0
#5
Yes my love....it really is that easy....'cuz engines can be that way sometimes. I promise you, you'll get used to it....it takes time.
saphiresque wrote:
... if you run chess software with only some seconds left for think, no whonder that you reach significantly worse results
though - for 1700-1900 opponents - some seconds must be still enough to be victorious
where's the proof?
Apparently, all you need is a smart phone and a bathroom.
And it works whether you are titled or not --
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32294465
1.The interface is fine on Chess.com for the most part, just need to organize messages better with a proper inbox.
2.It's slow because of the talking and video ads. Just go into task manager and end process on FlashPlayer.
3.Engine use isn't that prevalent. It'd be dumb anyway since everyone analyzes with them after a game. People are accused more often just for being sore losers from what I've seen. Take for example this game:
Because computers are so well known for their speculative passive exchange sacrifice offerings (in this game Rc1? was bad, though white's idea of exchanging a rook for a knight in a very closed position was interesting). Seriously, I remember these players from another thread and one accused the other of using assistance.
saphiresque wrote:
though - for 1700-1900 opponents - some seconds must be still enough to be victorious
Way higher than 1700-1900, actually. If I run my Stockfish for let's say 5 seconds, it will at least reach depth 14-15, practically beating anyone in blitz. 
skotheim2 wrote:
where's the proof?
no proof but I have no doubt that it is true
This is just an extention of this thread; http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/what-the-hell-is-this
but I remember that Erik said that chess.com bans every day many members for that
lol
warm_up_games wrote:
but I remember that Erik said that chess.com bans every day many members for that
this site has 11 mio members and between 10.000 and 25.000 players online; that hundreds are banned for cheating every day, does not show whether the site takes this serious or not
for met it sounds like chess.com does not very much against cheating in turnbased chess and everybody who runs the software on a separate device and is not so stupid to take always the best move, has no problems over here
Maybe you can start a better site.
Apr 15, 2015
0
#19
warm_up_games wrote:
just read this on Facebook:
I have used an engine on Chess.com and had problems breaking 2100 - At the time it was Houdini which was ranked amongst the top. I did so by letting the engine calculate a position for at least 1 hour but it usually was 3-4. I lost a lot and wound up with several draws. On here at least, the cheat detection worked and much less "proof" was needed when even reporting myself.
Link: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Say-NO-to-chesscom/1575359672726455?fref=ts
this is what I call a lie, you don't lose games against 2100 players using Houdini running 3 hours.
Really, and who is that motivated to run a computer for three hours to check if the cheating policies are working? is the best way to combat cheating, cheating yourself, imagine if everyone does the same
the guy is a douchebag and a lier
pdela wrote:
warm_up_games wrote:
just read this on Facebook:
I have used an engine on Chess.com and had problems breaking 2100 - At the time it was Houdini which was ranked amongst the top. I did so by letting the engine calculate a position for at least 1 hour but it usually was 3-4. I lost a lot and wound up with several draws. On here at least, the cheat detection worked and much less "proof" was needed when even reporting myself.
Link: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Say-NO-to-chesscom/1575359672726455?fref=ts
this is what I call a lie, you don't lose games against 2100 players using Houdini running 3 hours.
Really, and who is that motivated to run a computer for three hours to check if the cheating policies are working? is the best way to combat cheating, cheating yourself, imagine if everyone does the same
the guy is a douchebag and a lier
if they cheat, why not? Now you will say, if they cheat, why they are rated only 2100? Perhaps because every smart cheater is a part-time-cheater
just read this on Facebook:
I have used an engine on Chess.com and had problems breaking 2100 - At the time it was Houdini which was ranked amongst the top. I did so by letting the engine calculate a position for at least 1 hour but it usually was 3-4. I lost a lot and wound up with several draws. On here at least, the cheat detection worked and much less "proof" was needed when even reporting myself.
Link: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Say-NO-to-chesscom/1575359672726455?fref=ts