Then again, I think those who worry about computer users are apt to not focus completely on their chess game (which may weaken their playing strength by perhaps 200 - 300 points).
sftac
Computer users on tournament 5 minutes up to longer time controls
Sort:
What happened? I was looking at your games your an A-Class Player correct? you beat 2 guys rated 2 guys rated 1925 and 1920 but then I see you lost to a guy 1342 guy bad night???
http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=100505834
What makes you certain these lower rated players that occasionally beat you in tournaments are using computer assistance? I'm not trying to say at all that you're wrong. I think it's well known around here that some ppl cheat themselves that way. consequently that is why an online chess rating is meaningless. I think for the most part, ppl come here to discuss and get better at the game they love.
Come to think of it, that's seems like a hell of a lot of work for no reward and a complete waste of time. (a reward for using a computer device-which anyone has the ability to do- to win an chess.com tourny w/ no prize is certainly no reward)
The more I think about it, using a tablet/phone seems even more ridiculous and a waste of time. Where did you even come up with this idea in the 1st place to think that using a phone/tablet is actually a prevalent problem?!? I would imagine the amount of ppl that find such a mindless activity a valuable way of spending their time is something like .01 of the population..and unfortunately for them they probably have some type of learning disability?
Perhaps I am missing something or you can explain your conclusion more?
There's no guarantee that a higher rated player will not make mistakes that a lower rated player may not be able to take advantage of.
So, do some players avail themselves of (ahem) "assistance"... probably, but why would someone do that in some games and not in others?
The fact that it seems odd that someone would get a boost (or want to get a boost) in some games but not in others seems odd to me (obviously that doesn't mean that it absolutely can not be the case).
yes, I know that some ppl choose to use assistance and as I mentioned I believe that its accepted and known that it takes by a small amount of ppl and that it is also a colossal waste of 1's time in life to do so.
but OP had mentioned that 'phone and tablet use' was a serious issue to look into and I had never considered this as something that actually takes place,, and also since OP's online handle is verizon dsl i thought he may have some inside info on it or something? lol I dont know
A person who was devious, cunning and unscrupulous enough to utilise "assistance" would definitely never consider using a separate device for such activity! 
haha precisely why I didn't just ignore the standard 'cheating sucks' thread as per usual! :P
I've seen the game that Alec 289 has referred to. It's no excuse for dropping a queen no matter whether your opponent is using engine or not. Maybe your rating is inflated.
@Alec289 and Omega_Doom thanks for your insights but the game that you were referring is not even a live chess game to start with. That is online chess which I play 200-300 games "simul" style with other players. I play it everyday while I'm on a train going to work and going home from work. If you may review some of my games and you will notice most of my online simul chess games are lost when my internet connection on my phone goes down and I only have 24hours to response or else I lose. As for the cheating part. You will notice the sudden change in strength especially if you have played him more than once. Come on guys its not only about me. I'm talking in general. My suggestion is that higher rated players with more than 100 points above their opponent should not shed points because of the computer assistance possibility is worthy of consideration especially in (OPEN) tournaments. If you come to think of it. Lower rated players will benefit from it too aside from gaining rating points from beating higher rated players. It will also avoid discouraging higher rated opponents from participating in Open tournaments and challenging players which are definitely lower rated than them. Please don't get me wrong that I'm just bitter in losing or even suspects me of using computer assistance myself. I'm an active tournament player in real life. I just don't have a FIDE rating just yet. I'm living in the Philippines and if you don't know local chess tournaments here favors non-masters and most of them have rating requirements (under 1950 and under 2050 only). Most players who are really good is almost forced to play abroad just to play in tournaments. You can ask any filipino chessplayers you know and you will understand what I'm saying.
verizon i appreciate the response and clarification. However, I don't believe anybody actually said they thought it was you who was using assistance.
But since you mentioned it, I will admit the thought crossed my mind, and here's why: I personally get suspicious when I'm being outplayed by lower players..but that is really just arrogance with no basis. I've seen thousands of games where a chess player plays a given specific game several hundred pts below what their rating indicates. Maybe they only know a limited amount of tabiyas in chess, and you just happened to have played right into it. Or..maybe you just flat out blunder or are just generally out of your element for a game. It happens...all the time.
MY Point is: all of that is strictly suspicion, and can be very hard to prove. SO the fact that you are so positively sure that you played against a computer users in tournaments..well, I ask myself how did he get the proof? did he have computer cheat expert Ken Reagan plug the moves into his cheating algorhythms? That is possible I guess. It is also possible to review the game after with stockfish but as we know even that method has its holes.
Another much more basic possibility is the fact that you were using computer assistance, and you happened to notice in real-time that he was playing all the same suggested moves your 'phone or tablet' were running. My guess is that phone engines are not as widespread as computer engines and so its very possible you were playing against the same cell phone engine..and thus it is easy to conclude that your opponenet was cheating.
I really do not think that you cheat at all. your post seems sincere, but you mentioned you thought you were being implicated which I found interesting, since the thought crossed my mind but nothing was every said about it.
Another thing is you dont pose any real solution. If I followed correctly, you were basically saying that a lower rated player shouldnt have equal opportunity in a rating game and the limit of pts they can win for completing the MAJOR task of beating a much higher rated player (something that likely only happens on very very few occasions as I can personally attest)? That just seems ridiculous to me. and carries no logic. Its like keeping the rich richer, and the poor, poorer, with no way to get out!
or in other words, how are you supposed to increase your rating when your game truly improves if say a 1400 player has studied/ worked hard and now playing like a 1800...but unfortunately for johnny chazz player, he wont be able to get credible wins to correctly raise his rating to where it should be?!? AND THEN....THERES EVEN A RIPPLE EFFECT! now- under the chess.com regime of 'verizonDsl' thousands of ppl are now suffering 10fold in the chess.com tournaments in a totally different way..... NOW 50% of the players are underrated..so not only will THEIR ratings not go up...but all of the correctly lower rated players are going to MASSIVE DEFLATE!
SOON EVERYONE WILL BE FED UP WITH CHESS.COM'S RATING SYSTEM PROVISIONS, THE COMPANY BANKRUPTS..AND poor verizondsl is left with a hollowed out host domain of chess.com that, due to eviction notices, must now sell for 4 cents on the dollar.
No but really, Im not sure your proposal, or any variant of your proposal would do any more harm than good. WHile I believe that there are some idiotards that do what you claim...that # has got to be so ridiculously low..and those that do, probably only hang around for a few weeks or so, until they get board of mindlessly inputting computer moves all day and somehow justifying it as a quality game of chess. That's my take atleast.
and OP, if thats how the tournies are out there (though it does sound a bit out there) seems absolutely ridiculous. what kind of chess federation or sub federation running things over there would punish the local rolemodels of the game
@Mysound
I'm very grateful for your response. You have given important points and I took note of that. =)
Well, I guess my suggestion actually was lower rated players has all the rights to gain rating points for beating or even making a draw against higher rated opponents. I can't argue with that. My proposition involves a rating ceiling policy. Let's say for example if a lower rated opponent wants to challenge a player 200 points above him he will get a notice that the higher rated opponent would not lose rating points even if he beats or draws him in the game unless there are within 100 points range difference. The higher rated player would get the same pre-game message which both players have to agree by clicking the "ok" button and maybe given an option to revert back to regular rating changes which both parties needs to agree on also. I know my suggestion is quite new and may have some loopholes and I humbly ask for your view point on this too.
Now for the implication that someone is accusing me of using an engine that's why I know that the moves of my opponent is close to Rybka or Stockfish, the reason is simple. If I find the game interesting or suspicious I conduct a post-mortem analysis and that involves checking the engines that I have. I keep track of my games especially my losses. I study them thoroughly not because I'm a professional player but because chess have been my lifelong passion.
@All I would like to thank everyone for your time in reading my post and I hope our feedbacks and view points are at least read and even possibly heard by a staff. Who knows there will be constructive changes in chess.com if not the whole chess rating system "per se". =)
Hi Staff!
I believe your work in chess.com is excellent and your efforts priceless. However, I've been increasingly worried about computer users rated who plays well beyond their rating just to beat opponents 200 - 300 points above them. I mean before you organize open tournaments you should have precautions against players who use their mobile chess apps. I suggest higher rated players who join open tournaments cannot lose a huge number of rating points to lower rated players at least 100 points above them. This is also to encourage high rated players to play on open tournaments and remove the worry of facing a low rated opponent who uses stockfish or rbyka on their tablets, mobile phones or even mini-laptops.