Tbf he/ she is a titled FM. But its still very odd
look at the #1 rapid player. then look here.
Sort:
wrote:
facts, but why is it taking so long
Rapid isn't the most played gamemode on chess.com.
It's not that important. They only have like 40 games played, if they were to play more games, presuming they aren't cheating, their rating will drop.
But yeah. mods, you need to actually do your job and check this persons history because they've beaten a cheater who had 4k+ rating. This isn't acceptable.
Apr 8, 2021
0
#6
Soniasthetics wrote:
Rapid isn't the most played gamemode on chess.com.
It's not that important.
Not that important? Well as somebody who only plays rapid my lifetime goal of being No1. in the world in the rapid format has just been completely shot down lol.
AMC1991 wrote:
Soniasthetics wrote:
Rapid isn't the most played gamemode on chess.com.
It's not that important.
Not that important? Well as somebody who only plays rapid my lifetime goal of being No1. in the world in the rapid format has just been completely shot down lol.
Ur 1500.
Apr 8, 2021
0
#8
Soniasthetics wrote:
AMC1991 wrote:
Soniasthetics wrote:
Rapid isn't the most played gamemode on chess.com.
It's not that important.
Not that important? Well as somebody who only plays rapid my lifetime goal of being No1. in the world in the rapid format has just been completely shot down lol.
Ur 1500.
*You're.
There were plenty of punctuation errors in ur first comment, I didn't think we were in an english class
Soniasthetics wrote:
Rapid isn't the most played gamemode on chess.com.
It's not that important. They only have like 40 games played, if they were to play more games, presuming they aren't cheating, their rating will drop.
But yeah. mods, you need to actually do your job and check this persons history because they've beaten a cheater who had 4k+ rating. This isn't acceptable.
They didn't beat a cheater. They beat a person who manipulated their rating (and therefore is a weak player). The mods can't really do anything about that.
ninja888 wrote:
Soniasthetics wrote:
Rapid isn't the most played gamemode on chess.com.
It's not that important. They only have like 40 games played, if they were to play more games, presuming they aren't cheating, their rating will drop.
But yeah. mods, you need to actually do your job and check this persons history because they've beaten a cheater who had 4k+ rating. This isn't acceptable.
They didn't beat a cheater. They beat a person who manipulated their rating (and therefore is a weak player). The mods can't really do anything about that.
How come they specifically versed them and ended up winning? What the cheater just happened to not cheat when vsing them?
U don't see the suspiciousness there?
Apr 8, 2021
0
#12
Soniasthetics wrote:
There were plenty of punctuation errors in ur first comment, I didn't think we were in an english class
I didn't expect anybody to take my comment seriously as I thought it was obvious that it was a joke... Obviously I was wrong in that assumption.
"You're"
This guy just made George Carlin look like an amateur ladies and gents.
Soniasthetics wrote:
ninja888 wrote:
Soniasthetics wrote:
Rapid isn't the most played gamemode on chess.com.
It's not that important. They only have like 40 games played, if they were to play more games, presuming they aren't cheating, their rating will drop.
But yeah. mods, you need to actually do your job and check this persons history because they've beaten a cheater who had 4k+ rating. This isn't acceptable.
They didn't beat a cheater. They beat a person who manipulated their rating (and therefore is a weak player). The mods can't really do anything about that.
How come they specifically versed them and ended up winning? What the cheater just happened to not cheat when vsing them?
U don't see the suspiciousness there?
The rating manipulator never cheated against anyone
they're not cheating 
but yeah the fact that they beat a cheater shouldn't skyrocket their rating par to what it should have been if the cheaters rating was boosted.
google translate their status lol
ninja888 wrote:
Soniasthetics wrote:
ninja888 wrote:
Soniasthetics wrote:
Rapid isn't the most played gamemode on chess.com.
It's not that important. They only have like 40 games played, if they were to play more games, presuming they aren't cheating, their rating will drop.
But yeah. mods, you need to actually do your job and check this persons history because they've beaten a cheater who had 4k+ rating. This isn't acceptable.
They didn't beat a cheater. They beat a person who manipulated their rating (and therefore is a weak player). The mods can't really do anything about that.
How come they specifically versed them and ended up winning? What the cheater just happened to not cheat when vsing them?
U don't see the suspiciousness there?
The rating manipulator never cheated against anyone
Oh didn't know that, but that doesn't change the issue.
This person racks up over 4k rating, then vses artemis and loses. You don't see anything fishy about that?
If you think about it, they manipulated their rating to get 4k, so why would they deliberately vs an FM who they know they will lose to?
i think there's foul play going on by Artemis to boost their own rating.
Soniasthetics wrote:
If you think about it, they manipulated their rating to get 4k, so why would they deliberately vs an FM who they know they will lose to?
i think there's foul play going on by Artemis to boost their own rating.
They were going to be banned either way, so they probably didn't care. Also Artemis is not nearly as suspicious as the other player that won against them way too many times.
@HuntressesofArtemis
@Soniasthetics ngl that is kind of sus?
but it's also perfectly possible that the cheater just wanted to try to frame em. If I wanted to cause as much havoc as possible while cheating, that's what I would do. Boost a bunch of random players ratings just to cause chaos.
soooo is no one gonna talk about how a hentai/nightcore weeb with a text vomit description has literally beat out every grandmaster in rapid rating as well as broken the 3000 ceiling?
no?
ight