Announcements
01 Sep 05
01 Sep 05
Originally posted by TDR1From what I gather, Russ and friends used a couple of engines,
May i ask who has made this decision that they were cheating? Also how was it made? Its very stunning to me.
like fritz maybe, don't know details, but when you cue the engine,
it makes the exact moves made by these dudes, game after game.
Statistically, a human could never in a million years match the exact
moves of a prog, especially for hundreds of games. Its the volume
of games that match exactly what an engine did that gave them
convincing evidence. This is just my independent take on it but I think
I am correct in this assesment. That right, Russ?
- Joined
- 05 Aug 04
- Moves
- 219677
01 Sep 05
This is excellent news. Have there been any others before this?
Were people challenged about engine use and just left?
It sends a messge out to 'those who would' that they are wasting their time and money in giving it the 'I want my name on the highest score list'.
I know this must take a lot of time and effort but keep up the good work guys.
02 Sep 05
I'm sure this has been posted a billion times but what is the overwhelming evidence. Certainly everyone knows it IS possible for a chess player to be that good and have a record such as Ironmans. I'm just trying to understand the process for deciding someone is a cheater.
02 Sep 05
Originally posted by RussWell done Russ. glad to see something doen sad to see it come to this.
In response to concerns about the lack of visibility regarding the game moderators, a page has been added to the site map listing all recent accounts closed after game mod investigations.
This has been added today to coincide with a the removal of access to a number of accounts where overwhelming evidence pointed to cheating in some or all games played by th ...[text shortened]... ames assigned to these players will be resigned in a controlled manner at a later date.
-Russ
02 Sep 05
Originally posted by Grandmaster baterYes- before the game moderation team was formed, people were called out in the open forums and accusations ran wild.
This is excellent news. Have there been any others before this?
Were people challenged about engine use and just left?
It sends a messge out to 'those who would' that they are wasting their time and money in giving it the 'I want my name on the highest score list'.
I know this must take a lot of time and effort but keep up the good work guys.
In fact, the forums were almost completely taken over by cheating accusations which prompted the site admins to create the game moderation team.
And yes, several people left during this time (and just as the game mods when into place) claiming to be "perfectly innocent, but tired of accustions".
02 Sep 05
1 edit
Originally posted by ZorinYes, it's been addresses a million times, but I have nothing better to do while drinking my beer, so how about one more time....
I'm sure this has been posted a billion times but what is the overwhelming evidence. Certainly everyone knows it IS possible for a chess player to be that good and have a record such as Ironmans. I'm just trying to understand the process for deciding someone is a cheater.
There's a team of players ( the 'site moderation team'😉 that review questionable player's games and compare their moves to that of an engine. If a player matches the moves of an engine a great amount of the time (say, 90% of the moves for 150 games) that would be overwheleming evidence. The team collaborates among themselves to determine if a person is cheating.
Chess is an art, especially at the higher levels and the "best move" becomes more of an opinion or point of view than cut and dry. While is it possible for them to be good enough to beat everyone on the site, not even Kasparov's moves match that of Fritz that much.
02 Sep 05
Originally posted by ZorinStrong players with experience of OTB chess and playing against computers can nearly always tell the difference. It's almost a stylistic thing. Engines will every now and then come up with moves a human being would hardly consider. Some times they are very strong. An example of this is my game against Ironman (810608 - unfinshed though I'm objectively losing), in which he refutes a line of the Schliemann I had played numerous times OTB (including against strong players who had prepared against me) with the ugly (but very strong) computer move 11.Qe3 with the unpleasant point that the natural 11...Rf7 runs into 12.Qf3 threatening both Qxf5 and Bc4. Typical computer move! Of course I've known for a long time that the likes of Ironman and Yozzer were using powerful engines; it was obvious. I actually saw it as a challenge to try to defeat these monsters. I achieved it in game 997086 where Yozzer/Fritz goes down in 18 moves. I was mostly using Joe Gallagher's published analysis, but at least he's a human being! In my other outstanding game against Ironman (810662) I'm a pawn up for very little, so objectively winning, but I don't suppose I'll get the chance to finish that one now.
I'm sure this has been posted a billion times but what is the overwhelming evidence. Certainly everyone knows it IS possible for a chess player to be that good and have a record such as Ironmans. I'm just trying to understand the process for deciding someone is a cheater.
02 Sep 05
I say thankyou to the moderators and site admin for their hard work and diligence. There has been significant debate on this issue and I for one am glad that a pro-active approach has been taken.
Just the presence of a zero tolerence policy will reduce cheating. Having a process that has been proven to get results will make those inclined think twice.
Thankyou again, and keep it up.
Cheers, hege