Go back
Am I cheating?

Am I cheating?

Only Chess

2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Vote Up
Vote Down

18. exf5 was probably wrong. But no, in terms of winning with a rook and a king vs. a king, you were just fine.


That is pretty darn funny 😲

If he gets suspicious about losing in the most basic ending, I wonder how many other reports he filed.

For the record, the basic Rook endgame is in the 0-999 section of Silman's endgame course, no way its a 1200 level.😞

2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down


-Removed-
A few moves into your next game w/ him announce "mate in 34!" he will go nuts 😛

Vote Up
Vote Down

Correspondence chess allows you to use manuals, just not computer chess programs.


To try and understand the other lad. Game 9360301

RudySA - Bladsy Q RHP 2012 (Final Position - draw agreed.)



Maybe he does not know how easy it is.

The full game, Watch how White traps his own Queen v a Rook.
I've never seen that before. White move 92.

Vote Up
Vote Down


A full enquiry is needed. Let justice be done though the heavens may fall.

Vote Up
Vote Down


-Removed-
Since I joined the site a few years ago, one of the things that I have learned is that, when someone loses, the internet loser's first refuge is to accuse the other person of cheating.

The cool thing about internet chess is that, when you encounter someone like this, you can just make that game the last one against them, and move on to new players. There are plenty of really nice people to play, so there is no need to put up with idiots.


-Removed-
lol "moved more like a 1200 player"

Vote Up
Vote Down

Vote Up
Vote Down

The post that was quoted here has been removed
Perhaps the Star Wars NES chess game? 😉

I tried it once, I don't even think there's a way to play as black.

Vote Up
Vote Down

-Removed-
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.