Originally posted by TRACKHEAD21Well,his last (10 years ago) OTB performance is about at 2000 rating,so he would beat you anyway.
maybe he's here playing for himself instead of using an engine, so he could easyiely be a new 1300 player on the site. Can't believe I lost 2 games to that bum thinking he was just a damn good player.
Originally posted by eddie andersWhen you look at your profile chart of games, you see an obvious
i think he was just a very good player.even pulsatilla left in protest and she wouldnt do that for nothing i think he was innocent.i say fuck anyone calling him a cheat.
human style, like totally peaky, up and down, mine looks much the
same. Ironmans was a screaming line up to 2300+ and practically
flat on the top, a line that went up and down just a little with no
dips like ordinary players. I researched him myself and found
references to him playing games in 93, Postal games where his
postal rating was way less than 2000. He is about 50 years old and
there is no way someone that old is all of a sudden going to be
1900 points in 93 and 2500 points in 2005. He was an engine user
pure and simple, the guys checking even figured out the kind of
CPU and program he used and matched move for move using that
combination. No human could make moves that match a particular
combination of CPU's and programs, not even Kasparov. Don't be
fooled, he was a cheat.
Originally posted by sonhouse...but it's surprising that he never played another user who was using an engine and a top cpu in 1451 games, he was the big cheese i'd thought the temptation of beating ironman31 might have been enough to encourage some to fire up their engines, but maybe not.
When you look at your profile chart of games, you see an obvious
human style, like totally peaky, up and down, mine looks much the
same. Ironmans was a screaming line up to 2300+ and practically
flat on the top, a line that went up and down just a little with no
dips like ordinary players. I researched him myself and found
references to him playing ga ...[text shortened]... cular
combination of CPU's and programs, not even Kasparov. Don't be
fooled, he was a cheat.
You guys forget always that this is Correspondence chess where:
1)a very good player has lots of time to think
2)there's the luxury of the analize board,which there isn't OTB
3)you can consult databases and books
4)his rating was inflated due to playing almost only people rated 200/300 points below him
5)On Forum Wars I posted a research where you see that he played the top dogs about only 20 times
6)I think that given three days to think a 2000 player can easily find the best move to play
By the way I already explained a lot of more reasons but debating everything again doesn't make much sense since decisions are taken and unfortunately i can't change them.
Originally posted by RavelloI must admit I admire your loyalty Ravello, but the Guy was a cheat, plain and simple.
You guys forget always that this is [b]Correspondence chess where:
1)a very good player has lots of time to think
2)there's the luxury of the analize board,which there isn't OTB
3)you can consult databases and books
4)his rating was inflated due to playing almost only people rated 200/300 points below him
5)On Forum Wars I posted a research where ...[text shortened]... again doesn't make much sense since decisions are taken and unfortunately i can't change them.[/b]