Ratings:high,higher,highest!

also, people might be a gm in disguise (they don't reveal themselves)

NM isthatso, I think you have found a method to get a high rating, you use a chess engine, bravo! A title alone doesn't make you a good chess player!

thank you for your thoughts.., i noticed i played you ., i thought the game was consistent,  i played well ...it was a nice game.,

please take a look at chess.com procedure re complaints etc

thank-you...

lol..."Thank you for calling me a crook" (heehee!)

Notice the NM (and other titled players) have live-standard ratings of (in isthatso's case) 1600.

And then we see these random people with an 1800+ rating with 10 wins, 2 draws, no losses.

If chess.com uses automated cheat detection in live chess I'd focus a bit more on live-standard...

What can I say, some of us just have bigger live standard ratings then others

I have played online chess for many years -- have been accused of being a computer -- when i registered as a computer -- they said \\ I could not possibly be a computer -- I once had a rolling mate on one of the best speed players and a well known GM -- he claimed I was using a computer (this was before computer software and only 386 pcs with 1 meg ram were the fastest thing in town)  go figure

I have been playing online for almost 30 years == highest rating 2556 at blitz -- I have been over2000 uscf for the same time but have played less than 20 uscf game during that time == but have played close to 10,000 or more games against 2200-plus competition in one to two years!!

My greatest achievement -- beating GM Roman D. 3 times in speed games -- drawing a 2900 plus computer in 3 min blitz

There is away to raise your rating honestly to 2200 without cheating or using computers -- but most of this rating thing is ego -- a long time ago I just looked at everyone as a computer == 

then its about time you play me.

starfarmer - account closed

[COMMENT DELETED] HI GUYS

KONHIDRAS is a fake NM.

i think most players that are untitled and have a high chess.com rating are just titled players that don't want to be on thier public acount.

This is an interesting read. I play online football, sim football, which means no cheating or glitching, only fair play from you and your opponent. The way we achieve this is league play. We have a league with people we know and clear rules, and if people violate them consistently, we don't let them in or kick them out if they are in. Some are gameplay rules (you cannot use this tactic which is a known glitch or bug) and some are sportsmanship rules (tell your opponent gg, don't quit games early because you are losing, don't run up the score, and so on).

But the phenomenon you are noticing is pretty common among all gamers. To me, I say, why cheat? What is the point? If you won because you cheated, then you didn't really win anything. But people are immature and just want to win and see high numbers and ranks next to their name regardless of what tactics they used to get there. If you study psychology, you see that consequence based morality is the baseline for many people, and only after some intellectual maturing do people achieve a more principled morality, where they do what is right simply because it is right, even if no one would know the difference or if there would be no punishment for doing what is wrong or reward for doing what is right.

Best way I've found to increase chess rating: Buy " Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess". Those puzzles get your brain in "find a checkmate" mode. I flip through it before any otb tourney and I swear there are usually multiple situations that arrive that are just like the book.

I do not think you understand the rating system. If the rating system is accurate then there is no sweet spot.

Even if there is--why play for it?  Why not just try and improve your chess which means trying to play players rated 100  to 400 points above you?

Cheats, smurf accounts, people who don't want to be recognized