Announcements
01 Sep 05
02 Sep 05
Originally posted by no1marauderEr, I don't want to get into any arguement here, and I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong, but perhaps he did get skills. After all, When I was rated 1070 five months ago, I started playing again and won everything, and I didn't cheat, so maybe the same thing happened to this guy, no?
Reposted from the General Forum regarding Dom:
Look at his list of games, pages 4 and 5. He's rated around a 1000 on July 28 and then wins HIS NEXT 30 GAMES IN A ROW!!! On August 7, he loses a games to Mattb5 a game that started on June 20, where our hero lost his Queen on move 9 (probably a month before he started engining up) and then he win ...[text shortened]... ning 47 out of 48 games out of the blue! Let's not be ridiculous, ladies.
'Nuff said.
02 Sep 05
Originally posted by abejnoodNo.
Er, I don't want to get into any arguement here, and I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong, but perhaps he did get skills. After all, When I was rated 1070 five months ago, I started playing again and won everything, and I didn't cheat, so maybe the same thing happened to this guy, no?
03 Sep 05
Originally posted by CoconutYou can't go by a rating graph that is so shallow. 1400 is nothing. I am 1400, and I am not a good player. I also want someone to explain how the same analysis that pegged players of IM31, and Yozzer's caliber as cheaters could peg Dom as a cheater also. If IM31, and Yozzer were matching engines at 90% frequency (or whatever the cutoff was), and the same engines were used to analyse Dom's games, and his games had a 90% match rate, then he was matching the same engine's as IM31, and Yozzer, yet his rating stayed at 1400. This does not make any sense to me. Don't eat up what you are told as Gospel people, think for yourselves. You are being told that these are the results of the analysis, but you are not being presented with even a summary of this compelling evidence that proved beyond doubt the behavior of these players. Perhaps I just haven't seen it, so if it is out there, I'd love to see it. I just hope that the expulsions were not meant to be placatory, or based on personal biases, but in my eyes, things aren't adding up.
his rating graph suggests that he cheated for a period of time, which is against the rules. They must have done analysis on those games and found a significant matchup rate.
User 72095
Looks like he was suddenly granted magical skills overnight, then forgot them again, then got them for even longer. It's pretty obvious by looking where he was cheating.
03 Sep 05
Originally posted by tmetzlerWhy can't the proof be shared with the site? I guess the decision won't be reversed, so it is moot, but I'd still like to judge the evidence for myself. I imagine others would too.
The same techniques of investigation are not used in all cases.
Dom was actually BLATANTLY cheating. We had hard proof. I'm not going to give even a shred of a hint of how we knew this, but he was.
--tmetzler
03 Sep 05
Originally posted by rheymansThe proof is shared with the site, you merely need to spend 8 or 9 months analysing public games. Having said that I would like some more of the evidence given as well, since they have a dedicated page a short summary of why the player was believed to have cheated would not be unreasonable.
Why can't the proof be shared with the site? I guess the decision won't be reversed, so it is moot, but I'd still like to judge the evidence for myself. I imagine others would too.
I can see how it really would be easier the further down you went. This guy (Dom) had a rating of < 1,000 and suddenly started finding engine moves. You really don't need careful investigation after that, although I'd hope that there was. IronMan31 represents the trickiest one, as a good player you'd expect a high rate of engine moves. You'd expect him to find moves that are anti-positional or unnatural looking, this is advice given in Kotov's Think like a Grandmaster. They will have had to carefully analyse a lot of games to come to the conclusion that he cheated. First you have to work out where the database line ended, then where the moves that a human and a machine would diverge. You have to assess whether it is likely that a human could find the move and whether they followed the same plan as the engine would have. You have to make an assessment that it is unlikely that a human would have worked out the same possibilities. IronMan31 played over 1,000 games so that is an aweful lot of work. On the other hand that also gives you plenty of evidence as well.
I am disappointed by this, but the disappointment should be aimed at those who have failed our expectations.
03 Sep 05
Originally posted by abejnoodI have played and directed in OTB tournaments for 30 years.
Er, I don't want to get into any arguement here, and I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong, but perhaps he did get skills. After all, When I was rated 1070 five months ago, I started playing again and won everything, and I didn't cheat, so maybe the same thing happened to this guy, no?
I am a rated expert who teaches chess from beginner to master.
Simply put, there are combinations, ideas, and errors which are common to certain levels of play. While they are not indictments of cheating they raise a red flag. Even masters make mistekes, just less frequwntly.
Yozzer has been on my list for some time as are a half dozen other 2100 plus players.
Good work Russ.
Keep it up
Angela
- Joined
- 03 Sep 03
- Moves
- 87628
03 Sep 05
Originally posted by caissad4Feel free to send your list of other suspects to any of the game mods. I see you are a member of Tebb's clan, I'm sure he would welcome any suspect lists you send him.
I have played and directed in OTB tournaments for 30 years.
I am a rated expert who teaches chess from beginner to master.
Simply put, there are combinations, ideas, and errors which are common to certain levels of play. While they are not indictments of cheating they raise a red flag. Even masters make mistekes, just less frequwntly.
Yozzer has been on ...[text shortened]... for some time as are a half dozen other 2100 plus players.
Good work Russ.
Keep it up
Angela
--tmetzler
03 Sep 05
First and formost I would just like to say that I suck at chess. when my rating went into the 1000's I was excited to see progression of my game. I admit I work hard so I don't have time to set around and study chess like I would like to. It was a challenge for me to stay in the 1000's. I think with some of these players we may never know for sure but I think it will make some think twice. I like the idea of mind against mind it may be old school but to play on your feet is great. I pay money to play at this site so I don't want people cheating against me. From a person who loves the game of chess. Manny
Thanks to the RHP mods/admins keep up the good work.
03 Sep 05
Originally posted by SirUlrichThis is getting tedious. In this case the opening theory I used is nearly 15 years old from Gallagher's book "Winning with the King's Gambit", i.e. from a time long before engines were used in opening analysis. What on earth are you suggesting? That I should knowingly play inferior moves because the best move is somehow considered "opening theory"? Also I'm intrigued to know how you can be so sure you'd beat me OTB. For the record I have beaten 3 GMs (highest rating 2545) OTB and drawn with a large number of others, including 3 with the black pieces in the last few months. No doubt your record is far superior to that...
I am saying that all modern theory is produced with a considerable input from engines, so as you admit to following it, you are gaining a big advantage on the back of Fritz, just as a user using Fritz directly would.
Of course your cheating is less direct but if anything more likely to bring success.
Obviously I would beat you OTB, but on here, with ...[text shortened]... ating.
Maybe we should find a parkbench and play on my pocket set to sort the men from the lads
03 Sep 05
All of a sudden I am having a jameswoodley deja-vu 🙄
by The Fast Pawn ... My friend dominic 0987 wasent a cheater?? You have made a big mistake russ! i know him and i know he wouldnt cheat. He loses against 1200s and lower check his rating graph?
...
He is normally a 1300 1400, but as you can see in his rating graph it always going up and down because he wins games then he gets timed out cus he very busy and since the start of his 6 weeks break he has had plently of time to get his rating to were it should be.
...
I would like to know which games he cheated in because I have looked at his games and there is none that looks odd.
03 Sep 05
Originally posted by sonhouseMierda!!!!!!!!!!. Ironman31 should stay In my opinion he is a real player , I mean it make no sense playing about 200 games and using an engeni for that its boring and takes along time doing that. He is inocent !!!!!!!!!!! GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
From what I gather, Russ and friends used a couple of engines,
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 exac ...[text shortened]... is just my independent take on it but I think
I am correct in this assesment. That right, Russ?