I want to play humans so they can make mistakes like I do. However there are a few player who use computers to win - I dont know why - because they dont gain anything. I would like to name and shame them. Block their activity. The latest is a played named mcorr. He has not lost a game in over 30 matches at a grade of 1700+ now. I checked his moves, all were top computer choices. We should have a "Cheats list"
@academus saidHello and welcome to the site.
I want to play humans so they can make mistakes like I do. However there are a few player who use computers to win - I dont know why - because they dont gain anything. I would like to name and shame them. Block their activity. The latest is a played named mcorr. He has not lost a game in over 30 matches at a grade of 1700+ now. I checked his moves, all were top computer choices. We should have a "Cheats list"
This has been propsed earlier and there ahs been a list of banned Players.
detecting Computer chaets is a difficult endeavor and with Hunting has occured. You can Always send Feedback About People you find suspicious (ideally with your Analysis). But the TOS prevents you and everybody else from naming and shaming.
@academus saidI agree 100%. The best we can do is be vigilant in rooting these people out and ejecting them. Thankfully most people here are honest, but don't be shy about reporting suspected cheaters to the TD.
I want to play humans so they can make mistakes like I do. However there are a few player who use computers to win - I dont know why - because they dont gain anything. I would like to name and shame them. Block their activity. The latest is a played named mcorr. He has not lost a game in over 30 matches at a grade of 1700+ now. I checked his moves, all were top computer choices. We should have a "Cheats list"
P.S. Congrats to the ladies of Europe on the Solheim cup! I'm an American, but have always favored Team Europe. 🙂
@academus saidI'd just like to step in for a moment and point out that nobody knows the true identity or skill level in real life of the accused player except that player.
He has not lost a game in over 30 matches at a grade of 1700+ now. I checked his moves, all were top computer choices.
Everyone here starts out with a 1200p rating, and we *do* have masters and grandmasters among us, who may join the site anytime.
If the accused person is indeed a truly strong player, running off a series of wins against low rated players would be nothing surprising or in the least bit suspicious, and indeed it would be fully expected until the player's rating climbs high enough to start getting games with other strong players.
And that is only one reason why public accusations and shaming without proof should be avoided.
@Academus
I have played otb on and off for many years with poor success. I believe most or at least many rhp players would consistently defeat me otb. Beginning in the '60's I played chess by postcard and researched available games shamelessly, but with the knowledge of my opponent. Of course methodology has changed with technology and cheating is available to anyone playing on rhp. Nevertheless, I have used opening book moves I have found online. It is my belief that this is acceptable. If not I apologize and will desist or quit the site as is determined appropriate. But I do feel that some people have unrealistic expectations given the governing rules but perhaps I am misreading or misinterpreting them. Anyone checking my site will wonder that I have played so few games. There is a reason for this but not one I will share. Perhaps I should forewarn future opponents within three moves so that they can quit our game if they choose. I am trying to learn opening strategy via chess site recorded info; otherwise I have tried to improve by playing chess puzzles .
I have tried to obey the following rules: ("While a game is in progress you may not refer to chess engines, chess computers or be assisted by a third party. Endgame tablebases may not be consulted during play but you may reference books, databases consisting of previously played games between human players, and other pre-existing research materials.
While a game is in progress you may not refer to chess engines, chess computers or be assisted by a third party. Endgame tablebases may not be consulted during play but you may reference books, databases consisting of previously played games between human players, and other pre-existing research materials."}
I would appreciate it if a moderator or rhp heavy hitter would weigh in.
@dsdkyk
Your questions are not so difficult, I can help out.
First thing, how many games you play, and the pace at which you play, is your business and yours alone. *Nobody* has any reason or any right to question you on those matters, or worse yet to insult you. You are here for your pleasure and owe no explanation to anyone regarding how much time you devote to it or when you do so.
Second thing, boiling it down to the simplest terms, you may consult any written source of chess information (and game databases are regarded as electronically "written" information) at any time during a game. You don't have to say anything about that to any opponent, and in fact most of us will simply assume that our opponents have access to opening books and such, though of course a lot of players take pleasure in finding their own way from the first few moves.
What you may NOT do is consult ANY source that calculates moves or makes decisions for you.
If you reach a rook + 3 pawns vs rook + 4 pawns ending, you may read all the endgame books you can find, you may look at historical games to see how Capablanca played such endgames, but you can't ask your roommate, Stockfish, or an endgame tablebase what you should play.
Likewise in the opening, say even something early and simple like the 3rd move of the QGD, you can read all the books you want, you can look at game databases to see how often Nf3 is chosen, you can find out what Botvinnik played back then or what Carlsen plays now, but you absolutely may not enter the position into a chess engine to make a choice for you.
Just to be perfectly clear though, there is nothing wrong with using a chess engine or doing postgame analysis with a friend after your games are finished.
@Gambiteer
Thank you. Similar to my thinking but I still hesitate to offend all of these folk who say, as does Academus that they want to play entirely human opponents. I intend to continue as I have but it takes something out of it to feel criticized. Again, thanks.
@marc56 saidDon't you think that any genuine masters play here?
@Academus No one of the players in the first page of the tables are real human players. And probably in the second, too.
If there were masters playing here (and there are), don't you think they'd be able to run up high ratings here just as they do in real life?
It's my personal opinion that the percentage of players using engines on a site like this would be very small -- what would be the payoff, or the interest to provide motivation?
@Gambiteer
I agree.
Yes some people cheat but all chess sites have really good players.
Masters and even maybe a Grandmaster or two.
I was at gameknot playing blitz against a 1500 and I am almost 1700.
I crushed him and he accused me of cheating in a 5 minute game.
It seems everyone who plays chess and isn't very good doesn't realize that some chess players might be better than them.
I don't think our best chess players on this site will spend years and years using a computer and cheating.
Most cheats come in new and go hard for a while and then get bored with it.
Most of the best players on this site have been at the top for years.
Last but not least...
Use this site to get better for real over the board chess.
It is training.
If your opponent is cheating...who cares?
Play the board and try to make good moves and improve.
- Joined
- 06 Nov 15
- Moves
- 41301
@anderssen said"If your opponent is cheating...who cares?
@Gambiteer
I agree.
Yes some people cheat but all chess sites have really good players.
Masters and even maybe a Grandmaster or two.
I was at gameknot playing blitz against a 1500 and I am almost 1700.
I crushed him and he accused me of cheating in a 5 minute game.
It seems everyone who plays chess and isn't very good doesn't realize that some chess players might ...[text shortened]... .
If your opponent is cheating...who cares?
Play the board and try to make good moves and improve.
Play the board and try to make good moves and improve."
- anderssen
This is sound advice.
At my level, it's not too difficult to spot cheating.
But it doesn't bother me. Chess-wise, my ego gets checked at the door.
Players with insecurity issues do reveal themselves through behavior. And I may or may not indulge them when choosing future games. Depends upon my mood. 🙂
@wolfe63 saidAnderssen didn't live in a time where the best humans are worse than the computers almost every person has in their pocket. 😕
"If your opponent is cheating...who cares?
Play the board and try to make good moves and improve."
- anderssen
This is sound advice.
At my level, it's not too difficult to spot cheating.
But it doesn't bother me. Chess-wise, my ego gets checked at the door.
Players with insecurity issues do reveal themselves through behavior. And I may or may not indulge them when choosing future games. Depends upon my mood. 🙂
Oh, heh, "Anderssen" is a handle. Honest mistake.
Why do people hate being cheated? I dunno. Something about spending hours, days, years getting good at something ... then some chucklehead who has no clue about the game comes along and makes a mockery of all that effort.
@anderssen saidIf you're at the 1700 level, there are already "no titles involved". Probably the stakes aren't terribly high, either.
I take real chess tournaments seriously...
Not online chess.
Especially not online chess with no stakes or titles involved.
Maybe if I ever get above 2200 it will become an issue but at the 1700 level I don't think there is a problem with cheating.
Chess is as real as you make it - whether online, or in-person.