The moves of great tacticians will frequently be the same as those of strong chess engines. It's my understanding that there are engines no grandmaster can defeat - I haven't followed the evolution of the software that closely.
The issue isn't whether there are large numbers players who are willing to cheat. The question should be what percentage of those banned for cheating have tactical abilities that are comparable to those of a chess engine.
The means to cheat are readily available. Taking the anonymous nature of internet activities into consideration, and given the fact that the only consequence is being banned from the site, not a financial penalty for example, I don't find it hard to believe that a sizable number of people would be willing to cheat.
On the other hand, given the high level of play that chess engines are capable of, what percentage of the chess playing public has the tactical ability to be mistaken for software? My opinion is that this percentage is extremely low. Given the fact that GM's have trouble dealing with these things, you'd need to be close to that level of play for your moves to correspond closely to those of an engine.
If you don't use your real name. Some of the higher rated players here most likely to be hit with a false positive cheating accusation are known by their real names. If I were a titled player I would not play here under my real name for this reason alone, it's not worth the risk of getting the scarlet letter "C" by a top secret chess.com system.
The OP's original comment was regarding the large number of players who are banned for cheating, and his contention was that many of them are just good tacticians.
I don't feel that the number of players capable of this level of play is high. I don't think titled players come to this site to find good competition so much as they come to sell books, videos and coaching services.
Surprising this thread has existed for 16 hours.
The Moderators must be at a great Holiday Party, but THE LOCK is surely coming.