FREE - In Google Play
FREE - in Win Phone Store
Why is there not a button right there next to the board to report the player for cheating like there is literally anywhere else you can play chess online? Seems like you guys don't want to be bothered with it. Bottom line? The cheating on this site is absolutely RAMPANT and this server is less effective in identifying it and doing something (legitimately doing something) about it than anywhere else you can play chess online.
I think you already know the answer. They don't want it to be too convenient to report it. And I can't say that I blame them... :)
So, even though the other sites all make it simple and easy to report someone - and go to great lengths to detect and punish cheating - Chess.com just isn't going to bother? Nice.
Because chess.com is a pawn of the techies. They pretend to crack down on engine use but secretly...
...They don't. I'm playing 1000-1100's in blitz here who play like 1700+'s on other networks. It's so obvious what the deal is that it's a joke. I don't even bother reporting the games anymore. Chess.com literally has NEVER done anything about any report I or anyone I know have ever made.
I'd say what the engine users are doing that's just totally beating Chess.com's archaic cheat detection methods but I know they'll immediately lock the thread. It's so simple it's just pathetic.
Perhaps it is because you are reporting people who are not cheating? Has it occurred to you that just because someone beat you does not mean they were cheating?
It's supply and demand. The fewer cheaters there are, the less recourse there is for cheating. If you want the developers to make it easier to report cheaters, you need to convince more people to use engines.
I wanted surpass Carlsen and Nakamura's blitz rating here but these cheaters can break my ego. So I gave up on that idea. I decided: I will never mind losing to cheaters or honest players. That's chess. And - in Fischer's words - chess is life.
Forget it. This will just be a waste of time. Did I say ANYWHERE that just because someone beat me, they are automatically cheating? I'm talking about specific examples of them cheating. I clearly state that it's not just me but anyone I've ever known or talked to. Considering all of that (since I did say it), your post is ridiculous.
When a 1050 blitz here plays like a 1700+ OTB, he's cheating. That's the end of it. There are 50-100 move games where people use virtually no time on their clock with just a slight increment. Guys rated 1100 in blitz. Don't you realize that's just not possible? People rated that low can't play like that or they wouldn't be rated that low. Between the total lack of care for cheating, multiaccounting, and sandbagging, it's no wonder this place went from being where everyone's rated the highest to where everone's rated their lowest seemingly as soon as V3 hit. Again...this is blatantly obvious.
When a 1050 blitz here plays like a 1700+ OTB, he's cheating. That's the end of it.
Feel free to join the Cheating Forum and post your specific examples. Looking at your last 15 or so games, I see no examples of it.
And just because you may not know people who have had successful reports does not mean they do not exist. I can tell you, they do.
Look, I understand that you pay for the site but ...you're wrong. 1000-1100's don't play blitz like those guys in the last 15 games. Period. The fact that there are that many people totally wasting their time cheating for a rating that means absolutely nothing says tons about the human race.
The Cheating Forum, like the rest of this site, is archaic. It's absolutely useless. The fact that Chess.com catches a cheater now and then doesn't mean that cheating is not - by in large - going on rampantly here. If they catch 1 for every 5, the site is basically pointless and I can assure you that they're not shooting 20% on this one.
Isn't cheating stressful? Come to think of it: the SHAMELESS CHEATER has to use two gadgets and/or two programs and the loss of time is quite enormous. I know because I matched Chessmaster to Play Magnus. But of course the increase in rating you get is satisfying. But who cares? The cheater's chick, maybe.
??? The increase in a meaningless rating that you receive from cheating is satisfying to you?
You mean 1000-1100's do not play ridiculous openings and blunder 1-move threats? Because, looking at your last 20 games, virtually every game is decided by someone making a fairly large blunder, and their correlation to engine moves is extremely low. So, either you are playing a bunch of people with really crappy engines, or you are simply incorrect. I realize this is difficult news to take, but again, just because you lose does not mean your opponent was cheating.
Only on Chess.com (and this is true) do people think there's ego attached to a blitz game. There isn't, guys. Everyone else treats it as a training tool. Only here on Chess.com is virtually nothing but blitz played and only here do people specifically try to improve @ blitz chess. Really - nobody does that anywhere else online or off. So no, this isn't about my ego or my ability. I'm not good at chess yet. This is about knowing how people play at a certain skill level and also knowing that some drooler on Chess.com isn't playing better than a guy with a classical rating (truly classical - you don't play ANY of that on this site) 300 points higher than him. An 1100 blitz should be pretty regularly making huge, huge blunders. When he turns the engine on selectively when he realizes he's losing, nobody seems to be the wiser. Guys don't just start playing infinitely better chess AFTER they drop a bunch of material and exhibit horrible board vision. You know that's not how chess works.
I think you are missing the point.
You assume you are good enough to detect when someone is cheating. This would imply that you are good enough to realize when a move is a computer move. It is quite apparent (looking at your games), that assertion is incorrect. Thus, throwing out that assertion, you are not qualified to make such a claim.
For example, one of your recent 3|2 games that went 70 moves (I was analyzing it by hand, but the interface kept screwing up my typing, so here is the output from the SF8 analysis - skipping over the book lines and positional mistakes made by both sides):