Originally posted by divegeester
My opponent started messaging me once we were down to king vs rook and king, insisting that they had played 100s of games in this scenario and never got anything more than a draw. However (even) I know that with a little patience and careful moves it's not too difficult to mate with rook and king.
At the end my opponent accuse ...[text shortened]... d my moves were more like a 1200 player.
Thoughts? Do I look like I have done anything wrong?
According to the Terms of Service the last time I looked at it books and so forth are allowed. What would comprise cheating is engine data, so the results of a calculation by an engine on that particular position, which in this case would refer to an endgame tablebase (EGTB). So even if you had looked it up on something like Wikipedia you'd be within the rules, which means he's pretty hazy on what constitutes cheating.
I checked 5 piece EGTB, comments start on move 43:
Given that by the time it's K+R v K to change the result you have to drop your rook, that you didn't checkmate by the most efficient route, and that the result did change a few times at the five piece stage (K+R+P v K+R) I think that there is no evidence of cheating whatsoever.
The game demonstrates the problem with cheating accusations quite nicely. In the K+R v K part of the game you never put a foot wrong in the sense that you didn't make a move that would have drawn the game according to EGTB - but since you'd need to drop the rook to do that it's not that surprising. There were a few result changing errors in the five piece part of the game (and some real howlers earlier on) but your accuser could just claim that you didn't start cheating until move 54, and it's almost impossible to prove that you weren't as the inefficiencies can be explained as you trying to cover yourself. So the only way to prove you weren't cheating in the face of that accusation is for the result to change, which is ludicrous as it leaves you needing to blow the ending to prove you weren't cheating.