people who have odd playing histories!

You're not supposed to name other players in this sort of context, try reading the forum rules before you make any other posts accusing someone of cheating. 

You can complain about alleged cheaters directly to the management here, click on help (in between your name and logout in the top right-hand corner)

Ok first of all, "1800 and never loses" made me lol

I looked at the guys profile and game history and nothing about it looked fishy to me.  I think you're just paranoid.  Also he hasn't broken 1300 yet on turn-based.

Also looking at some of the games, the moves seem completely normal and definitely not a computer.

I looked at the game you played against him and nothing about it looked fishy.  You were better out of the opening but you lost the advantage.  His sacrifice to open you up was a good idea (and wouldn't take a computer to see it) BUT his follow up was poor and you were winning again (like a normal human would play) but then you screwed up and he won.

This is how normal games go.  The real crime is you're badmouthing him because you don't like to lose.

I'm playing someone now who has a 2100+ rating in correspondance chess, but they have a 1188 rating in live chess after 296 games.

This guy has battered me 5 or 6 times in correspondance games, I never even got close to a draw, I know he uses a database (chess mega something he said) and I'm fine with that, just wierd how someone can be so strong on a 3 day/move game, yet pretty rubbish at live chess.

Not asked him about it, only thing I can think of is that a child/wife/monkey or someone uses his account (I don't play live chess on mine, but have let others for example)

lol

I wonder, do any off these "I lost but I'm so awesome, my opponent must be cheating"-people play OTB at a chessclub? 

My guess would be no. 

It is possible if (s)he blunders a lot. 2100+ is quite strong, but if he uses his/her time in correspondence chess, and is not the best in calculation then it certainly could happen.  All your openingknowledge strategic understanding and endgame technique is useless if you miss simple 2 move tactics in blitz.

His win % and rating difference is suspect for sure... not that it proves anything... but this is the sort of thing that's fishy, the OP should take some notes lol

IMO there's no good way to explain a 1000 point difference between live and turn-based unless like he said it's two different people playing.

I know it proves nothing... and they guy may only play live chess after being up 24 hours partying/drinking all night or something.

My thoughts too.

"I beat my 7 year old brother and senile uncle all the time so I thought I'd be a big shot online but when I threatened a knight fork MY OPPONENT SAW IT AND DIDN'T LET ME!!!! CHEEEAAATTTTTEEERRRR!!!!"

I don't know, thanks I will try to stay away from this person but, I suggest you just report him, if you haven't already

Well enlighten me, old wise one. I'd love to hear more pearls of wisdom from someone with such a high rating as yourself, and then having the cheek to call me a 'novice' lol.

Bullet or blitz chess I can understand someone being susceptible to miscalulations in a majority of games. 20 and 40 min timed games not so sure

Guess it must be 2 people using the same account.

The basic error is thinking of a rating as an absolute measurement when it's a relative one based on your opposition.

Also, the greater quality of chess a person is able to produce due to longer times is afforded to both players, not just one.  So it's unreasonable to assume your rating will go up due to longer thinks as your opponent's play is equally benefited.

Also, they're different rating pools.  Each pool contains completely unique players to that pool or players who refrain from 1 or more pools (for example I don't play turn-based or standard).  Because the rating is relative to your competition you can't explain a rating difference by time control alone.

For both players.

It's harder to win against someone who blunders less.

Hey. I'm 1400 in CC but about 300 lower at 10 min chess. I find if I play slow enough to win I time out, and if I play fast enough to not time out, I make so many blunders I lose. Guess I am just hopeless at 10 min chess. if you accuse me of cheating at CC I shall punch you in the nose.:)

Me too. Well said.

The difference for me from standard to CC is around 300ish points, the main reasons being in CC i use a database to get me through the opening until my opponent deviates from the database and I also use the analyse function for each move in CC  both of which are not allowed in live chess.

I find my standard rating is equal to my OTB rating.

Everyone's is off by a few hundred points.  1000 is ludicrous.  I challenge anyone with a turn-based rating to maintain a live rating 1000 points below their turn-based for 50 games and make a guess as to how impaired you'd have to be before playing that badly.

So, someone is using a mega database (opened using chess engine), and only consult the database not the engine. Tell me, what kind of human personality/character that can do it. Once you understand human psychology and the human itself you will find out that the probability is close to zero!

Don't quote me then rant off subject, it's weird... if you want to rant just do it.

this could easily be the case for older people. they probably have a bigger difference between correspondence and shorter time controls.