Mindless cheating accusations

@OP: Cheating should be discussed only in the Cheating Forum, and not in the main forums. Please continue this discussion there.

So your opponent thinks there's only one explanation for one of your ratings to be 300 points higher than the others? Give me a break!

If you look at my profile, you'll see that my online rating is hundreds of points higher than my standard and blitz. Why? Well, I STINK at blitz. With relatively little natural talent, I just don't think that fast. I'm not strong on standard because I hardly play standard at all. And I'm pretty good at online because, given the time to think, analyze, and move the pieces around, I think pretty well--apparently.

Your accuser is an idiot.

This is hilarious, anyone who accuses another of cheating is simply arrogant, saying that only Rybecka can beat them. Just ignore lowlifes like these and keep playing your game.

I'll work on it. My only camera is on webcam. Everytime I bring him over, I start working up the webcam, and he starts getting excited. I think I need somebody to operate the webcam while I hold him. Stay tuned, the plan is in the works lol

Speaking of the differences of bullet ratings and blitz ratings. I like to listen to metal and have some beers when I play. But I only do that with my bullet rating, because as I see it, who cares what your bullet rating is anyway. Do you guys do that too? And really, when you think about it, even your blitz rating doesn't matter that much. The only chess I really take seriously is long games OTB. I would be interested in hearing all of your thoughts. How seriously do you take bullet and blitz games?

I work night shifts and my game play (and rating) goes up and down like a yo yo between 1400 and 1600. It mostly depends on how tired I am as to whether I win or lose. Often a players ability, concentration and insight varies for a lot of reasons. I personally despise cheating as I believe chess is a gentlemens game where honesty and honor should prevail. If I wanted to play a computer I would just play Fritz. I generally know when a player is using an engine because of signs such as a 1480 player pausing for long periods early in the opening and the playing of computer style moves, sudden disconnects throughout the game with "miracle" moves after each reconnect. I believe cheating is far more common than the administrators will admit. They dismiss it as minor. I think about 20 - 30% of players cheat with engines regularly and more do so intermittently. They try not to get caught by not cheating every game. The other methods are using underhanded tactics like trying to engage chat in the middle game. Some others use blatant abuse such as racial steriotyping like the lad from South Africa who asked me if I have shagged a sheep lately (I'm Australian) and using other dirty tricks. Sure I can disable chat but I want to catch these insects to turn them into the administrators. These types need weeding out. I know, "gamesmanship" has been part of the non-chess combat for hundreds of years and it is a psychological battle but it should only be expessed on the board between human minds.

Bob

Well, I wouldn't assume someone is cheating for a pause in the opening. First, if you're playing an opening that is new to you, or that you have been studying lately to improve, you might pause. You may be thinking,"how does that go again?", or, "oh no, he played the Bb5 variation, I haven't studied that yet". Remember, most of us are not masters, we're all trying to improve, and sometimes that requires thinking, even in a blitz game. And as for the disconnections, some people have better internet connections than others, and sometimes you lose a game for that reason. The other day I was disconnected during a 3 minute blitz. By the time I was reconnected, I was hopelessly behind on the clock and lost.

And as for the chatting, I usually try not to chat during a blitz or bullet game, because I type so slowly. But some of these young players, say teenagers or even young college players chat and text constantly! I recently went back to school to finish my degree, and some of these young students, say 18, 19 or 20 text on their phones at lighting speed! They may not even realize they're distracting you. Now if someone is insulting you, that's different. But if a person is just trying to be friendly, you shouldn't hold that against them. I'm sure there are cheaters, but I don't think there are that many. And by the way, you may not be able to tell by "style" of play. If someone is say 20, and they have been playing against Fritz for 8 or 10 years, maybe several hours a day, wouldn't they pick up some of the computer programs "style"?

Yeah, in the absence of human players, I played Fritz for ten years, Kasparov's gambit and numerous other early programs. I shed a lot of those stereotypical Fritz moves after 3 or 4 months of online play. I recognise the typical engine type responses. I'm not referring to unusual moves in the openings but very well known routines that most players over 1400 rating could do blindfold. Why pause for 15 - 20 seconds on moves 2, 3 & 4? I'm not referring to dropouts from players with very slow data rates, but with full bars and no lag, from countries such as the USA with fast services. I can understand drop outs from Lagos or Outer Mongolia. Following drop outs, the player often comes up with a killer response after the play was going badly for him/her. I can't prove a player is cheating but I feel that a 1200 rated player coming up with GM calibre series moves is very suspect. Of course Chess.com admins are going to assert that cheating is at a very low rate. If they admitted a higher rate then the reputation of this site would suffer and perhaps they would lose players, members and earnings. They are hardly impartial arbiters to monitor and accurately report cheating rates.

Well I live in Reno, Nevada, not Outer Mongolia. But I live in kind of an older building and my internet connection is not that great. It's not bad, but I do get disconnected sometimes. Now, I'm going to say something, and I don't want you to take it personally. May I ask, what is your rating? Are you sure someone needs Fritz to beat you? Do me a favor and post some of the games that you lost and are convinced someone cheated. Let me see some of these, "grandmaster" moves you claim is proof of cheating. I'm not trying to brag at all, but I once beat a national master at a live tournament. Over the board, in person. I never once left the board, not even to go to the bathroom. I didn't cheat, I didn't get help, I just beat him. I also drew another master twice, also in person. Just because someone makes a good move, or plays a good game, that doesn't mean they're cheating. Maybe the person has talent, but has not developed it enough yet to be consistent. It's kind of a lame excuse for losing a game. But if I'm wrong, post the games where you think people were cheating. Let us all take a look at these "grandmaster" moves you speak of.

I don't claim I can prove that people cheat but it is a gut feeling based on the clues and behaviors of opponents that are rated 100 - 200 points below me. Do you claim that people don't cheat at all? If you do conceed that there is some cheating then what percentage of games are won by using chess engines? I suspect you don't know the rate anymore than I do. Why do you defend Chess.com so vigorously? While I cannot prove my suspicions I am entitled to my opinions and I'm entitled to disagree with you. There is no need to try to bludgeon me into submission. You made the original claim that cheating is exaggerated and that these claims are just lame excuses for losing. You prove your statement! I know when I've lost because of my poor play or blunders. I also know when I've been outclassed with better play by a player in my own realm. The administrators are secretive about how they detect cheats but also claim that there is very little cheating at lower ratings such mine. I doubt that. Sure the majority of play is genuine but I'm asserting that a small but significant minority either use a chess engine consistantly or intermittently.

First, I am not saying no one is cheating. And I would not describe my post as " bludgeoning". As for me defending Chess.com, you obviously have not read some of my previous post. I won't bring up the subject again, but I put up a post recently in which I was very critical of Chess.com. After a short period of time, they handled the situation very well. So I do like the site, and the people who run it. The post I'm talking about had nothing to do with cheating by the way, it was another subject. But I am certainly very happy with the way they handled it. But back to our subject, you still haven't put up any of the games you're speaking of. I would like to see the games that you think cheating is involved. Why not let us all examine them?

I didn't make a note of the games and I'm not going to go through all my games played. Some of the games in which I suspect cheating I won but their were anomolies and variations in game play from terrible to excellent moves. It's not sour grapes but I may misinterpret some fair games as cheating. My comments are not scientifically defendable with a definitive study backed up with rock solid data. I enjoy chess win lose or draw but I only enjoy games where I feel I am playing a human, not a computer program masquerading as a human. Let's go back to the title of your post. "mindless cheating accusations" Which accusations are mindless? All? Some? A few? Obviously you seem to think that most accusations of cheating are flawed and probably just sour grapes from bitter and twisted losers? You don 't really know do you? No more that I know if my view is accurate. Sure, some of the games I suspect are bogus may not be, but I feel, rightly or wrongly, that there are small but significant proportion of online games played with the illicit use of chess programs. It's just human nature that, given the opportunity, a proportion of people will cheat. We will never know what proportion exactly I think, although chess.com admins may have approximations from their analyses. I think the great majority of games are played in good spirit and fairly so I will continue to play on chess.com. Enjoy your life!

Well, as I have already said, obviously there are some people who cheat, but I don't think it happens as often as you think. You said in a previous post that you thought the number was 20 to 30 percent. I have never stated what I thought the percentage is. When you said 20 to 30 percent, was that just a guess? And yet now you come to me with, "you don't really know do you"? I never said I knew, you did!

Of course it's a guess. How would I really know unless I did a scientific investigation. However your assertion that accusations of cheating are mindless implies that you actually know what proportion of players cheat.You don't know anymore than I do. The chess.com administrators make some conflicting remarks about cheating. On one hand they write that 99.9% of games do not involve cheating which suggests no action is required to detect or minimise cheating but their other comments seem to indicate they see it as a problem which is serious enough to devote the time and effort to devising detection methods. They are hardly impartial arbitors of cheating and have a great deal to lose if they lose membership and revenue. I never wrote that I "knew", I wrote I "guess" or "suspect".

You're putting words in my mouth. When did I say that all accusations are mindless? Nothing I said "implies" that I know the percentage. "Mindless" was directed at the person I was writing about in my first post. One of his "proofs" was that my blitz rating was 300 points higher than my bullet rating. I think the differnece now is about 200, but I'm not sure. But nevertheless, you don't consider that mindless? Aren't most people's bullet rating less than their blitz rating? And some of the things you said were mindless. You said something about if the person thinks too long in the opening. Sorry, but that is mindless. There are any number of a million reasons someone might take a long time in the opening. What wouldn't be mindless is if you put some of the games up, but you refuse to do so. This entire conversation is taking place in a vacuum. Why don't you just put up the games and let us see for ourselves?

You started THIS thread with "ok all you people making mindless cheating allegations, stop now" That is an ambiguous statement. It could be interpreted as cheating allegations are mindless and should stop now or cheating allegations come in 2 varieties, mindless and ordinary. Stop the mindless ones. It also suggests that you think people would know their allegations are mindless, baseless, idiotic or illconsidered and by posting this command they will wake up to themselves. You suggest in your responses that I should read your previous posts to get your meaning. Are you suggesting that people reading your post must read all your previous posts? I would know you have been critical of chess.com if I read your previous posts. Why would I? Should we read the thousands of posts on chess.com? Alas, If I haven't got a mind I can post no more. It seems you are holding all the intelligence, you've sucked me dry.

Your post are making less and less sense by the day. If I say to you, "all you people making cheeseburgers that don't taste good, you need to stop". Now you are telling me that means everyone who has ever made a cheeseburger has done so poorly? What nonsense! As far as my "command" causing someone to wake up from themselves, clearly that has not worked with you. You want to keep talking, but you don't want to take the next logical step in this conversation. You said some people are  making "grandmaster" like moves in some of your games, but you won't put the games up. Obviously because you're afraid of what we'll say. Some of these "grandmaster" moves are probably routine moves that everyone who has bothered to study chess knows. But to you, they are mysterious. There is only one thing left to do in this conversation, and that is for you to show these games. Maybe I'll agree with you, or maybe not. We'll never know until you have the guts to put the games up.

I am assuming, chess.com analyses stats of people whose ratings are going up at a certain rate, then analyses their games against what moves would have been made, by all known and available chess engines.

No one need worry about an accusation of cheating from a punter... that carries no weight.  

Get accused by chess.com?

The chances of making even 6 moves in a row identical to a computer chess engine must be remote, make 20?

I also assume, chess.com leaves a massive margin for error too... so if youve been called a cheat by chess.com either...

a. You are cheating.
b. You don't watch a lot of porn, instead, you spend your time playing computer chess, memorising its moves in various situations and copying them.  

Not cheating rain man... but for gods sake...

Go and watch some porn.

I wonder if The Phaser and Droceretik ended up dating?  Or at the very least, did the recommendation from the Jelly Donut.