Forums

TOP 10

Sort:
TheGrobe
TheGrobe
May 22, 2010
0
#41
Count_Rugen wrote:

Interesting to note that the top rated player is 86 years old.

That date is the day after Lenin's death -- given that his profile picture is Stalin, I doubt that's his real birth-date.

SteveCollyer
SteveCollyer
May 23, 2010
0
#42
cm84 wrote:

...This just seems pretty silly as it's a level playing field for everyone. If it was easy, everyone would have a high rating. I think it's absurd to say a CC rating is no indication of someones ability at chess and isn't deserving of any respect.

Not if one player wins by using an engine to suggest a few key moves.

That's where CC lacks credibility compared to OTB ratings.

Sure it's possible to cheat OTB, but it's a hell of a lot easier to do so on a regular basis (and get away with it) in CC.

TwistedLogic
TwistedLogic
Closed: Inactive
May 23, 2010
0
#43
TheGrobe wrote:
Count_Rugen wrote:

Interesting to note that the top rated player is 86 years old.

That date is the day after Lenin's death -- given that his profile picture is Stalin, I doubt that's his real birth-date.

Checked this player stats and it says he has 91 wins and 1 draw... Then i look at his 960 chess performance where he played 1 game and lost.... So he tried 960 chess and directly lost the game(no chess engines there). I mean even if he would never have playud 960 chess before, he should be strong enough not to loose that first game ?? 

So i decided to check a few more games. 1 tournament game with 2 players, 1 player is in the top 5 he he just playes with firebird. Every move when out of theory is just a game played with the firebird engine(checked). When i leave the engine long enough eventually the played move comes as best with the firebird engine.

pluuto
pluuto
May 23, 2010
0
#44

http://www.enotes.com/genocide-encyclopedia/stalin-joseph

It is pretty disturbing that chess.com allows their best player by rating to use avatar of the worst criminal against humanity ever.

Propaganda of such person names should not be allowed here,what is next,nazis?

smileative
smileative
May 23, 2010
0
#45

nice one, TwistedLogic Smile - I tend to check my opponents' stats too - the cheats are fairly obvious if you know the signs to look for - I drag those games out in the hope that the staff ban 'em before my inevitable loss - three times this tactic has worked - but on another six occasions (at last count) they ddn get banned till after they'd beaten me - never mind, at least the staff are on the ball Smile

TwistedLogic
TwistedLogic
Closed: Inactive
May 23, 2010
0
#46

Well still checking a few games and firebird seems popular. I know i won't be popular saying these kind of stuff, but people are naive imo. When people are Anonymous on the internet they do whatever it takes it seems. And btw i did this finding in just like 15-20 min...

TheOldReb
NM TheOldReb
Show your flair!
May 23, 2010
0
#47

Who are the very best CC players today ? Arent they also titled players in otb chess ? I am also one of those who thinks only otb chess/ratings are reliable to gauge someone's true chess ability. Its simply too easy to cheat in CC/online play thus ratings gained there are not so reliable. I see class players ( otb ) bragging about how they have beaten/drawn GMs in online/CC play but have never done so in otb... suspicious ? I have beaten GMs in otb play as well as online. I often lose to class players ( otb ) in online play but havent lost to one in otb for a decade or more...... strange ?

mschosting
mschosting
May 23, 2010
0
#48

Cool lets have another witch hunt!

Lets burn them if we think they cheat ok?

TwistedLogic
TwistedLogic
Closed: Inactive
May 23, 2010
0
#49
algernonn wrote:
Reb wrote:

Who are the very best CC players today ? Arent they also titled players in otb chess?

I don't know. But it's known that CC does not require chess knowledge. For instance, this freestyle tourney has been won by a team of two amateurs (one 1300, the other 1700) against teams formed by GMs:

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2467

Interesting article, but it kinda makes me sad ;) So two operators(i don't call them chessplayers) won the tourney. it makes me feel like the WCC Anand vs Topalov when they said afterwards they had so many help, using computers, Anand admitting he had help from Kramnik, Giri, Kasparov and Kramnik, Topalov admitting he used some xxxx core supercomputer for analyses and preparation. I don't hope this is the future for chess.

mschosting
mschosting
May 23, 2010
0
#50

If you wish to win computers are the only way...

JTLindskogHageman
JTLindskogHageman
May 25, 2010
0
#51
mschosting wrote:

Cool lets have another witch hunt!

Lets burn them if we think they cheat ok?

No witchhunt cos the cheaters do exist and no killing or burning just delete the account will do.

JTLindskogHageman
JTLindskogHageman
May 25, 2010
0
#52
mschosting wrote:

If you wish to win computers are the only way...

You see, I told ya they exist.

JTLindskogHageman
JTLindskogHageman
May 25, 2010
0
#53
Schachgeek wrote:
TwistedLogic wrote:
TheGrobe wrote:
Count_Rugen wrote:

Interesting to note that the top rated player is 86 years old.

That date is the day after Lenin's death -- given that his profile picture is Stalin, I doubt that's his real birth-date.

Checked this player stats and it says he has 91 wins and 1 draw... Then i look at his 960 chess performance where he played 1 game and lost.... So he tried 960 chess and directly lost the game(no chess engines there). I mean even if he would never have playud 960 chess before, he should be strong enough not to loose that first game ?? 

 

No chess engines in 960?

You're delusional.

No you are delusional, it was a very good observation made by twistedlogic, the grobe and count rugen, he defo tried but didn't know how, lost and never tried again, this ain't rocket science schach geek. 

JTLindskogHageman
JTLindskogHageman
May 25, 2010
0
#54

The beautiful and ever so smart WGM Natalia Pogonina wrote that probably everybody is cheating, whether it´s just blunder check or full support doesn´t matter. The solution you will find in her profile. While you´re there check out her pic´s, awesome.

smileative
smileative
May 25, 2010
0
#55

Well I doesn't cheat, cos has enough trouble operatin' computer as it is - half the time I doesn't know what people is actually talkin' about - but I DOES know that OTB I can kick all kindsa butts Smile

JTLindskogHageman
JTLindskogHageman
May 25, 2010
0
#56

well thats the way it should be kick ass without silicon support, good on ya smileative.

jonnyjupiter
jonnyjupiter
Show your flair!
May 25, 2010
0
#57
JanusTimmanus wrote:
Schachgeek wrote:
TwistedLogic wrote:
TheGrobe wrote:
Count_Rugen wrote:

Interesting to note that the top rated player is 86 years old.

That date is the day after Lenin's death -- given that his profile picture is Stalin, I doubt that's his real birth-date.

Checked this player stats and it says he has 91 wins and 1 draw... Then i look at his 960 chess performance where he played 1 game and lost.... So he tried 960 chess and directly lost the game(no chess engines there). I mean even if he would never have playud 960 chess before, he should be strong enough not to loose that first game ?? 

 

No chess engines in 960?

You're delusional.

No you are delusional, it was a very good observation made by twistedlogic, the grobe and count rugen, he defo tried but didn't know how, lost and never tried again, this ain't rocket science schach geek. 

The point wasn't well researched. He resigned the game after 2 moves - presumably he didn't like 960 and decided against it. This is not an indicator that he is cheating in standard games. There are other things that might be suspicious, but this isn't good evidence in itself.

JTLindskogHageman
JTLindskogHageman
May 25, 2010
0
#58

You are right, it´s not great evidence and in court it won´t be accepted as evidence. This guy obviously doesn´t want to loose, i think no matter what. He might have tought when he started the 960 game "what a lovely game, different set up, what a challenge since nobody can beat me at the real deal" then makes two moves and all of a sudden doesn´t like it?????

Could be, we´ll never know.

JTLindskogHageman
JTLindskogHageman
May 27, 2010
0
#59
chessmates wrote:
jonnyjupiter wrote:
JanusTimmanus wrote:
Schachgeek wrote:
TwistedLogic wrote:
TheGrobe wrote:
Count_Rugen wrote:

Interesting to note that the top rated player is 86 years old.

That date is the day after Lenin's death -- given that his profile picture is Stalin, I doubt that's his real birth-date.

Checked this player stats and it says he has 91 wins and 1 draw... Then i look at his 960 chess performance where he played 1 game and lost.... So he tried 960 chess and directly lost the game(no chess engines there). I mean even if he would never have playud 960 chess before, he should be strong enough not to loose that first game ?? 

 

No chess engines in 960?

You're delusional.

No you are delusional, it was a very good observation made by twistedlogic, the grobe and count rugen, he defo tried but didn't know how, lost and never tried again, this ain't rocket science schach geek. 

The point wasn't well researched. He resigned the game after 2 moves - presumably he didn't like 960 and decided against it. This is not an indicator that he is cheating in standard games. There are other things that might be suspicious, but this isn't good evidence in itself.

He may be Stalin himself... or his rebirth..!! One can well  imagine an 86 year old Stalin crouching before the computer and moving the cursor to make his move. May be he has a few  dead generals  helping him to hold the mouse properly..!!

Well he ain't Stalin but what is scary he's defo a wannabe.Money mouth

bondocel
bondocel
Aug 25, 2010
0
#60
FirebrandX wrote:
algernonn wrote:
FirebrandX wrote:
 

Keep in mind that is NOT CC, but rather AC using normal OTB time controls. If what you said were true, then the top ICCF players would be average players. Most (if not all) are in fact masters using their knowledge combined with deep engine analysis.

I didn't say anything, I just read the news. It is shocking however that some weak amateurs are able to defeat a team of two 2600+ GMs when computers are involved. The prize money (10.000$) was extremely motivating so it's reasonable to expect that the best centaurs in the world took part.

And it only happened once. Ever since then, it has been GMs or other titled players with deep pockets. But my point still remains, these same two kids are not top CC players, which is entirely another ballpark alltogether.

Apparently it has happened regularly, even engines playing alone on a strong computer being much better than engine-assisted GMs:

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3745

Maybe the top CC players don't need money? 16.000 $ while sitting at home in an armchair and you say "I'm not interested"? Looks fishy...

This forum topic has been locked