Forums

Suddenly every 900 I play has an accuracy of 75-90. Damn it!

Sort:
PlaylistSubs

I'm no GM of course, but I kinda expect to play against players of my lvl (900ish blitz, 1100 rapid). Suddenly, every player I encounter seems to know the best moves when it gets tough... meh.png

I mean... Yeah, "go cry to your momma!", right? But this is getting kinda riddiculous.

Martin_Stahl
PlaylistSubs wrote:

I'm no GM of course, but I kinda expect to play against players of my lvl (900ish blitz, 1100 rapid). Suddenly, every player I encounter seems to know the best moves when it gets tough...

I mean... Yeah, "go cry to your momma!", right? But this is getting kinda riddiculous.

The accuracy algorithm is going to result on 60-90% for most people in most games.

https://support.chess.com/en/articles/8708970-how-is-accuracy-in-analysis-determined

quierom

Cheating, but of course the chess.com cannot say, we can not catch,

Torquayman

Maybe we are playing bots and don't know it. I have experienced the same thing. One minute you are playing well and next minute, loads and loads of losses, 700's are harder to beat than 1250's. I don't experience this on lichess, there is some BS going on with this site. No doubt a know it all will come along and explain it, they always do

PlaylistSubs
quierom wrote:

Cheating, but of course the chess.com cannot say, we can not catch,

How hard it has to be to spot cheaters who play 80-90% of a game by themselves and only cheat for 2-3 moves... I do not blame this site at all! It feels nearly impossible to spot some guys...

It's also pretty clear that a lot of this is just me "tilting" and/or having a "bad day"... So hard to tell where the truth is!

I just think that sometimes, you can "feel" the opponent suddenly gets better in the middle of the game, you know... You're outplaying them from beginning, knowing the opening, winning material, having a nice and easy middle game and then BOOM, wow, it was actually Magnus the whole time! You know what I mean? :-D

BigChessplayer665

Cheating only 2-3 moves moves does not help unless they are competent enough to convert the position let me tell you 900-1000 is not competent enough it is more likely that your opponent would be cheating almost everymove

Also welcome to chess one minute your doing well another your not thats just how it is

PlaylistSubs
BigChessplayer665 wrote:

Cheating only 2-3 moves moves does not help unless they are competent enough to convert the position let me tell you 900-1000 is not competent enough it is more likely that your opponent would be cheating almost everymove

Also welcome to chess one minute your doing well another your not thats just how it is

Oh man, I hear you! Although, speaking for 900ish blitz players, I'm pretty sure that knowing 2-3 moves in difficult situations would definitely change the outcome even at our level...

BigChessplayer665

I don't think so if they can't see the reasoning behind why it's a good move knowing the best move for 3 moves will not help them at all unless it is like checkmate in three moves or something ridiculous like that

PlaylistSubs
BigChessplayer665 wrote:

I don't think so if they can't see the reasoning behind why it's a good move knowing the best move for 3 moves will not help them at all unless it is like checkmate in three moves or something ridiculous like that

Oh for sure, I can relate to that! Some three "random" computer moves could probably even mess it up for me haha ;-) But when you're in a tough spot, a spot that was maybe built up slowly, and now you just have to deal with something and you're not really sure what the best move is (and you maybe have like 3-4 moves on mind), knowing the best move in such situation would be priceless! Also when you're losing or getting forked/pinned in some situations, knowing the next 2-3 BEST moves will just get you straight back into the game! Damn, knowing even just one best move in a lot of my games would change the outcome...

ChessMasteryOfficial

Players at lower ratings can have widely varying skill levels. Some players might be underrated due to not playing many games, recent improvements or having a few bad games that dropped their rating.

MariasWhiteKnight

Sigh.

If people cheat, they dont lose games.

If they dont lose games, their rating rises.

Thats why most cheaters are obviously to be found at high ratings, i.e. 2000+, not at lower ones like 800.

This most basic logic seems lost on many people. Instead they stare at this questionable metric "accuracy" and claim it is sufficient to prove that somebody is a cheater.

When the reality is simply people who have played thousands of games have experience in many situations and will find many good tactics and moves in many situations, even if their overall play is still only 800 because they dont train and their ability isnt universal enough to actually climb.

Meaning they lose a lot, too.

Khnemu_Nehep
MariasWhiteKnight wrote:

Sigh.

If people cheat, they dont lose games.

If they dont lose games, their rating rises.

Thats why most cheaters are obviously to be found at high ratings, i.e. 2000+, not at lower ones like 800.

This most basic logic seems lost on many people. Instead they stare at this questionable metric "accuracy" and claim it is sufficient to prove that somebody is a cheater.

When the reality is simply people who have played thousands of games have experience in many situations and will find many good tactics and moves in many situations, even if their overall play is still only 800 because they dont train and their ability isnt universal enough to actually climb.

Meaning they lose a lot, too.

There are tons of cheaters at lower levels.

Torquayman
MariasWhiteKnight wrote:

Sigh.

If people cheat, they dont lose games.

If they dont lose games, their rating rises.

Thats why most cheaters are obviously to be found at high ratings, i.e. 2000+, not at lower ones like 800.

This most basic logic seems lost on many people. Instead they stare at this questionable metric "accuracy" and claim it is sufficient to prove that somebody is a cheater.

It's reassuring to know, no one has ever been caught cheating below 2000.

Nice logic, shame it's total tosh, us sub 2000's could all sleep soundly tonight.

Martin_Stahl

https://support.chess.com/article/648-what-do-i-need-to-know-about-fair-play-on-chess-com

https://www.chess.com/article/view/online-chess-cheating

https://www.chess.com/article/view/chesscom-update-may-2024?#FairPlay

The site closed 56,000+ accounts in April for fair play violations and has a full team of staff working on reports along with some automated systems for detection.

https://www.chess.com/article/view/fair-play

That said, discussions of cheating, potential cheating, or cheat detection are not allowed in the general forums. If you would like to discuss join the following club. https://www.chess.com/club/cheating-forum

This forum topic has been locked