Here is the official chess.com rule regarding cheating:
 | What are the rules for playing? | |||
| ||||
 | ||||
I hope chess.com bans this guy immediately, or at least issues a warning.
copy cat
Sort:
I hope chess.com bans this guy immediately, or at least issues a warning.
Jul 14, 2008
0
#23
One could argue that copycat is OK as long as you can find the game in a database. You cannot be penalized for playing a line which is good, just because you are playing the other side of it in another game. I would argue that as soon as it is not appearing in a database, or a book, that copycat is not ok.
Get in touch with the other good player and arrange a time to make your next move which is as awkward as possible for the third party. Then the next one of you to move , go on vacation with 2 minutes left.
Presumably, even if he is hovering over the computer waiting for 'his' next move, it will have taken him more than a couple of minutes to put the previous move in so he will either time out or have to put himself on vacation too.
If he hasn't thought of that scenario, it would probably completely throw him.
Just an idea.
Jul 14, 2008
0
#25
this absolutely IS cheating. he is essentially getting outside help in his games. please message me the games and i will have him resign both or close his account.
The simple initial solution I think, is as a premium member, just make all your other moves, and let your vacation status kick in for this guy, or depending on who has the time edge, have his other opponent do this.
Jul 14, 2008
0
#27
No, the simple solution is to contact chess.com staff and have them handle it.
It makes a lot of sense - they can analyze the player in ways that I cannot, also they can (maybe) add detection for the future. I would never have found it unless the player had not made the mistake of mirroring two games from the same tournament. Only at the chess.com level do they have the capability of having detection models which cover everything.
Besides, I've already messaged the copycat a rather nasty message, so when he returns from vacation he is in for a surprise :-).
yes, it's why I said "simple initial". Definitely you were right to contact the staff. Also, if you dont want to squander a few hours of vacation time, then just contact the staff. I was thinking, as a fun 'while you wait' activity really.
oh yeah, i just found the games and realised he's on vacation, so you cant have fun with the clock. Still, rather nasty messages ftw!
I think you could have found it without being in the same tournament, unless you are very generous with how you see 1300 players. Even if he was playing many games you could probably be suspicious enough to report abuse in case he was using some dumbed down computer. I think 'man in the middle' games should be explicitly banned in the rules, as it is slightly different to outside assistance.
oh, yeah, I meant to ask, the position is interesting. Is it drawish, or does black have an edge, or did you have everything in hand?
Jul 14, 2008
0
#31
Black has the edge. Against the "mirror" opponent in the tournament I scored one draw and one loss. I don't know if I could have saved a draw here.
can't remember the name of the book but this was part of a con in a sidney sheldon novel. whilst on a cruise the con man played 2 simultaneous games against 2 highly rated chess players and took numerous bets with the passengers that he could score at least a draw against 1 of them.
anybody remember the name of the book ?
i was kicked in the ass twice by a 1000 rated player at a turnament 
(i checked the moves he made in the game explorer lines, he played the opening to a very deep stage).
it is bad and ridiculus behavior, the only way there is to comat abuse and cheating is with a chainsaw.
Jul 14, 2008
0
#34
uritbon: Following book openings is not what we are talking about here.
what an odd way to cheat you think they would just use a computer program
Baseballfan wrote:
This is not cheating. As has been mentioned, this is really not any different from relying on a database to make one's moves, which is perfectly legal. I would recommend putting this player on your blocked list.
EDIT - I was wrong on this. Please use the REPORT ABUSE link if this happens to you.
I've read with interest each of the responses to the original post in this thread. None surprises me more than the above quote by one of chess.com's own staff members.
How can this behavior be considered to be anything other than cheating? IMHO it cannot. I also do not believe it should be perfectly legal to consult a chess database during the course of a game. If one wishes to consult a database, it should be done after the game is over during the postmortem.
Jul 14, 2008
0
#37
EagleHeart wrote: Baseballfan wrote:
This is not cheating. As has been mentioned, this is really not any different from relying on a database to make one's moves, which is perfectly legal. I would recommend putting this player on your blocked list.
EDIT - I was wrong on this. Please use the REPORT ABUSE link if this happens to you.
I've read with interest each of the responses to the original post in this thread. None surprises me more than the above quote by one of chess.com's own staff members.
it's his first week on the job :) he's learning.
Jul 14, 2008
0
#38
EagleHeart wrote: Baseballfan wrote:
This is not cheating. As has been mentioned, this is really not any different from relying on a database to make one's moves, which is perfectly legal. I would recommend putting this player on your blocked list.
EDIT - I was wrong on this. Please use the REPORT ABUSE link if this happens to you.
I've read with interest each of the responses to the original post in this thread. None surprises me more than the above quote by one of chess.com's own staff members.
How can this behavior be considered to be anything other than cheating? IMHO it cannot. I also do not believe it should be perfectly legal to consult a chess database during the course of a game. If one wishes to consult a database, it should be done after the game is over during the postmortem.
It's my understanding that the ability to use databases grew out of the tradition that correspondence chess allows the usage of books. Opening books, endgame books, tactics books, etc.
For what it's worth, I think it is great that books and opening databases are allowed. Having assistance during the game is invaluable - after the game it is not nearly as good in helping you learn. How many times do you play an opening and think to yourself "I really should look this up someday, I never seem to get a good position out of it".
I think the line was crossed when the game went "out of theory", and the copycat crossed over into the "getting assistance from another player".
I'm probably misunderstanding something. If someone were to look at one of my games, or anyone else’s game, and use the opening moves against me, I would think that's ok. I don't see how it matters whether the reference games are finished or not. If I don't want the person using information from archived games, including games in progress, I just have to bring them out of book. I thought people can't use engines and they can't use real-time, interactive advice, but they can use archived games. If the reference game is still going on then it's just an archived excerpt of a game; yet to be completed. It's still reference data, isn't it? Again, I probably don't understand something. And I've never done this, nor even played in a tournament; in case the practice is illegal :).
And I'm an idiot for posting this because all some people will probably remember from this post is that that aquaMan dude thinks it's ok to cheat!
Jul 14, 2008
0
#40
One of the keys relates to your comment "... I just have to bring them out of book". Take a look at one of the previous posts which describe the copycat attack, and you will see this is not possible.
You can play white against Kramnik and black against Anand, and you can guarantee yourself 1 point out of 2, by making them play against each other.
No, asking anybody else is cheating.
I can appreciate that in using a database or using a book, sometimes one has a game where the result contained "no thought" - but most of the time this is not true. What I do not agree with is the equivalence of database to relaying, since relaying always contains no thought.