Kramnik Hates Chess.com

He plays only bots because he's convinced he can't climb above 360 due to mass online cheating, he's gone into detail about this in other threads.

Look up the word "obvious" and the term "common sense", and use your brain instead of relying on Kramniks in the future.

I could tell how to cheat in bullet you but my post would be used for wrong purposes.

Bots are not "programmed to blunder", that's a myth.

That's wrong, it's not about me "climbing". There are many reasons to stop playing online pvp. I never complained about how my rating is low or how I can't climb or anything like that. I don't care about online rating as much as you do.

If the bot wasn't programmed to blunder it would not play at 360 level, would it? Obviously not.

Another insult, I am reporting and want to bring mods' attention to this. This is unacceptable.

I was correct and you weren't, so obviously your brain failed you didn't it?

It wasn't suspicious, it was obvious he wasn't cheating. Completely obvious. Just a simple assessment of motive will tell you a 3200 player vs. an 1100 player would just never see any reason to cheat in a game like that. Why would you cheat if you are 3200 playing an 1100? And the fact he said outright he was doing analysis in an educational speedrun made it even more obvious. The fact he openly told his audience what the engine was saying made it yet more obvious... because cheaters don't do that, do they? Did Hans come out, before being caught, and admit he had cheated in the past? Obviously not, because cheaters don't do that, do they?

Stupid. Yes, I'm publicly shaming you dunces. You shouldn't be making cheating accusations on this site anyway, that's a violation of the rules in the first place. But how do we dispense with this madness without public shaming? No amount of reason is enough - next week it'll be a new accusation from Kramnik and we'll be in here yet again debating some obvious thing for an hour and a half.

@basketstorm, go ahead and send me a private message with how to cheat at bullet chess. Nobody but me will know. And I don't play actual bullet anyway.

Quoting before he edits out, thinking mods won't see

Why do you need this? Cheating is not nice. I bet you'll report me after that. If you really want you can find yourself. You think fast time controls could prevent cheating? That's wrong, engines are not that slow on modern computers. Analysis happens in realtime without a need to manually copy/input moves. Everything is lightning fast.

Well you were obviously wrong, so how objective were you? Not very. You know, objectivity is correspondence with reality, your ideas do not.

Whatever. I have said my piece here. Have a nice day defending Mr. Kramnik.

He will be known forever as the guy who went after cheaters (and probably failed) as opposed to his World Champion Status.

I have been reading this debate, and here are my opinions.

1. You cannot prove that you are not a cheater. Nobody can. So it's your right to be suspicious of people.

2. However, a majority of people are not cheating. Accusing people of cheating, I believe, is against the Chess.com policy, so Kramnik getting muted is justified.

3. Online cheating is a problem. I believe that Kramnik is fighting for a just cause, but going about a little bit too far. Chess.com needs to crack down on online cheating. It's no fun for anyone playing a cheater. How to do that, though, is something I don't have any ideas for. Any ideas?

4. You should not attack someone during a debate, just their points, pointing at one's elo and calling them insults is not exactly going to get someone to agree with you.

5. The problem with chess cheating reporting, is that sometimes people, out of rage, accuses people of cheating when in reality, they just got outplayed. I believe that is what ibrust is trying to say.

I will say though as well, basketstorm, if you get insulted and report someone for calling you a dunce, then maybe you should not be on here. There are people that will insult you online, and you just have to learn to deal with it. Reported someone for calling you for calling you a dunce does not really improve my perception of you. To one, it might make you look soft and emotional, and that's not the type of person to talk about accusations of cheating, as it supports the claim that you can't really be talking. Just saying, you have to be more formal when it comes to debating to get people to support you.

Kramnik is a very interesting character. On one hand, he is fighting something that's not a very good thing(cheating, obviously), but on the other hand, he is spreading negative energy throughout the community, and blocking anyone that disagrees with him. Kramnik is bringing a negative energy to the community, and actions need to be taken to stop it. Simple as that. I'm not saying I support cheating, but throwing empty accusations at people who happen to be playing well, does not strike me as very positive.

Also, in chess, sometimes you have good days, where you play well,( I had a 13 game win streak one time) and other days you played like a 100 rated player(I lost 16 of my 18 games one day and titled nearly 200 elo recently). Just because you got outplayed, does not mean your opponent cheated. That is not a good mindset to have, and it just brings such a negative energy.

3.Lot of ideas (apart from complete cessation of online pvp of course that'd be the most effective method):

• They could've at least stopped this policy of second and third chances (if you ban - ban forever if you are 100% sure he is a cheater, if you are not 100% sure then change that "banned for violating fair play" message because potentially false accusations are as bad as the cheating itself, should be set to something like "pending for review, this is common and not an indication of fair play violation". Cheaters know that in the worst case they just will have to be more careful in their next account. This is a spit in the face of honest players.
• they should start banning by IP-address/browser-fingerprint (easy to do), look up by user-names to ban double accounts (like this @ibrust user has a second account @ibrust777 - should be easy to detect if they will care)
• start forcing users to provide phone number for authorization (harder to make new account - need new SIM each time)
• give less visibility to online ratings. Because rating is one of the motivations. From showing only approximate rating to hiding it completely. Removing leaderboards. I mean if you can't avoid manipulations in your leaderboards, you have to stop showing them
• make tournament awards hidden. So often I've seen cheaters reach top places in tournaments. They love that.
• make fair play calls mandatory even for non-titled but high rated players even if all they do is just some online blitz, not even tournaments. Like "you were picked for a fair play check, please schedule a call with us, pick time slot etc, prepare your ID, two cameras, one will capture you and your device and room from the back, other will show your face and other side of the room. Your problem where to find two cameras, combine a smartphone with laptop/webcam etc. You would be asked to make a tour around your room with either of cameras. Your account would be put into suspended state until you can arrange this". On this call an expert would ask player to analyze some positions out loud. They might take positions from player's own games. Then the player will have to play a few games under surveillance.

Pretty good ideas ngl. That would definately help.

You are wrong, I don't have to deal with it, mods have to deal with it. There's a community policy here. And one of my points initially in this topic was how mods often ignore verbal abuse but quickly close topics about cheating. I am formal enough: I don't insult people.

But is accusing people constantly of cheating against the chess.com policy? It makes sense they would ban someone if they reported players like there is no tomorrow. I do agree, that verbal abuse is never really taken seriously, and that it should be reduced here. People don't want to have someone to bully them every day for saying their opinions.