Originally posted by Steve ExeterYou have admitted that you have no evidence of secret tool useage, your PC is free of Spyware, you have not been presented with the details of the Game Mods investigations. How is it that you are so sure that you have been the subject of a covert operation?
I don't have any hard evidence. I just have to assume that Russ has something that is beyond a reasonable doubt to detect the presence of an engine otherwise I cannot see how the case against me could be so strong that the Game Mods unanimous agreed to ban me.
The early games are not really admissible, these were know about and widely discussed whe ...[text shortened]... . This is the key thing, no prevailing use of high engine match can be found in any of my games.
I'm not saying you are or are not guilty of the charges for the record.
1 edit
I'm not saying it's covert - I'm saying Russ' "secret tools" cos it's the Game Mods who insist on keeping them secret.
All I'm saying is that the circumstantial evidence alone cannot be enough to ban me. So, Russ, must have a method of confirming engine presence and use that is tangible and beyond doubt.
However, in my case, I think that evidence has been misinterpreted and that's unfortunate.
Originally posted by Steve Exeteri think i could also beat tebb ... after many many games ... it could happen ...
Well, I was on average around 140th in the player tables. I'm not a Meman or a Gatecrusher or Tebb. I've never, ever, shown the promise of being and the fact I beat Tebb in one game (a very tough game that I nearly blew due to nerves) doesn't prove anything. I doubt I could beat him again if we played another 50 times.
to beat him once is no proof ... but it does add to suspicion ... and you must agree that suspicion builds and builds.
you started low rated .. then grew ... you also knocked tebb a big surprise ... these are two independent suspicious elements ...
hmmm
i would not consider them sufficient evidence of sin ... but i would be watching very very closely.
1 edit
Originally posted by flexmoreI beat Tebb before Ironman31 was booted - if I was being watched closely then I would have been in the first wave to be banned.
i think i could also beat tebb ... after many many games ... it could happen ...
to beat him once is no proof ... but it does add to suspicion ... and you must agree that suspicion builds and builds.
you started low rated .. then grew ... you also knocked tebb a big surprise ... these are two independent suspicious elements ...
hmmm
i would not consider them sufficient evidence of sin ... but i would be watching very very closely.
As I said, I've played all the Game Mods many times, they have never suggested that I was under any kind of suspicion, quite the opposite in fact.
Originally posted by Steve ExeterHave you layed out these concerns to Russ in any way?
I'm not saying it's covert - I'm saying Russ' "secret tools" cos it's the Game Mods who insist on keeping them secret.
All I'm saying is that the circumstantial evidence alone cannot be enough to ban me. So, Russ, must have a method of confirming engine presence and use that is tangible and beyond doubt.
However, in my case, I think that evidence has been misinterpreted and that's unfortunate.
Originally posted by StarrmanI guess he's saying that he can't see another way for the mods to be sure.
You have admitted that you have no evidence of secret tool useage, your PC is free of Spyware, you have not been presented with the details of the Game Mods investigations. How is it that you are so sure that you have been the subject of a covert operation?
I'm not saying you are or are not guilty of the charges for the record.
In his win against Tebb, if we assume as the mods obviously did that he is an 1100 player, then we have to assume that he had the engine switched on for that game. The fact of the matter is that he only matched up in the 70%s and made some terrible blunders, including one which gave Tebb the draw in the end game which Tebb missed.
As proving cheating is fairly subjective, that game could be looked at like this... Ok, so he matched in these 70odd% of moves. He used the engine for those. In his non matches a few of them are pretty big blunders. That means that he didn't use the engine the whole time to try to avoid detection, and his non-engine moves were of his "true" 1100 strength. Case closed.
Pure speculation on my part, but that's all we have at our disposal.
D
Originally posted by zakkwylderNo, I have not, but I am not here to badger him, or even to overturn the ban and I shan't be making a habbit of posting here after today. I just wanted a chance to put my side of the story across to show that it's not as black and white as people seem to think.
How about since you registered under your new name?
Originally posted by Steve ExeterWell, you seem adament about your innocence. If you truly are, what have you got to lose? If you're not going to post again after today, whats the worst that could happen? Steve Exeter gets banned. Try it for your own sake. You have nothing to lose and something to prove obviously.
No, I have not, but I am not here to badger him, or even to overturn the ban and I shan't be making a habbit of posting here after today. I just wanted a chance to put my side of the story across to show that it's not as black and white as people seem to think.
Originally posted by flexmoreI was looking at my archives last night, cos I knew that my play wasn't great when I joined here, as I had only ever played 3 different people in chess. I was never in a club.
you started low rated .. then grew ... you also knocked tebb a big surprise ... these are two independent suspicious elements ...
I lost a few games to 1200odd players at the start. This could be viewed as suspicious, but I know exactly where my improvement came from.
1) I also played drunk. I decided not to do this anymore after throwing away a drawn endgame against paultopia just over a month after joining.
2) I noticed that I was getting hammered in the opening, especially by higher rated players, so I started using databases to try to learn some openings.
3) I spent hours on tactics sites practising forks, pins, skewers, etc.
4) I had a dial up connection so a few of my moves were rushed until I became aware of chesspad to analyse my games offline.
Without knowing this, my early play could be deemed to be suspicious. Can this type of thing be used as evidence in banning a player? Sure it could be used to identify a potential cheat, and to find a rough date to when the engine may have been switched on, but apart from that, it shouldn't be used as a piece in the "varied and conclusive evidence" used to ban a player.
D
Originally posted by Steve ExeterIf you work in IT you should know there's no way this site (or anyone affiliated with it) can 'infiltrate' your PC and 'spy' on anyone.
Yes, I work in IT and my PC is free of Spyware. I've tried to find what methods Russ is using. I am convinced it's not Spyware but a legitmate functionality in Winboard that can be exploited.
Stop fueling god damn paranoia!