Originally posted by Stroubidoul2I just took a peek at your history. I was under the impression you had 'progressed' over a bit longer time, but now I noticed you went from 1350 to 2000 in just three months! ha! there are obviously people who progress way faster than for example I do, and I put more hours into it than you claim to, but 3 months from 1350 to 2000 is pretty laughable. 😀
See... I can not change the way you think...
"No... believe me... I'm not crazy".....
"Of course you're not... just take your pills..."
pff......
I could even bet the same 1350-point on the beginning of july was when you started using an engine. you were clearly tapering towards 1400, and then it's suddenly up! up! up!
Originally posted by Sicilian Smaugyea, but you can get from 1000 to 1300 in a couple of hours. with basic opening principles, reading through tactical motifs and taking enough time with the moves. do some tactical problems and you'll hit 1400 in a week or two. so I thought it was a moot point to look at the first games...
He was struggling to get over 1000 for a while: User 248530
We react on complaints received.
To violate 3(b) requires evidence of engine use. A rating rise may paint a picture, but it is insufficient on its own to prove engine use. It is our job to analyze a suspect's games (and many of them) in order to reach a judgement on whether the match-up statistics are humanly possible. When they are not humanly possible, ie when a suspect's ability to play like a computer far exceeds that of the world's top GM's, we are forced to conclude that the suspect is using an engine to cheat. We then notify the Site Admins who review the evidence and when they are in agreement the suspect is banned.
Originally posted by GatecrasherOK, thanks for this explanation.
We react on complaints received.
To violate 3(b) requires evidence of engine use. A rating rise may paint a picture, but it is insufficient on its own to prove engine use. It is our job to analyze a suspect's games (and many of them) in order to reach a judgement on whether the match-up statistics are humanly possible. When they are not humanly poss ...[text shortened]... he Site Admins who review the evidence and when they are in agreement the suspect is banned.
So you mean that when the suspect is banned, you are a hundred percent sure of his guilt?
So there is no need for me to argue because you already made your decision and there is no turning back?
So now, what are my options if any?
What read into his post is that he isn't against legit bannings but he believes that it has or could become a "witch hunt" where anyone who improves is potential kindleing
I sort of agree with that if that was his point.
I am up 200 points in a month and I don't think I peaked yet so I'd hate to be a suspect. Logically, you can't prove a negative so I any evidence of me NOT cheating wouldn't prove I never cheat.
Originally posted by Stroubidoul2I can't discuss any specific case in the forums.
OK, thanks for this explanation.
So you mean that when the suspect is banned, you are a hundred percent sure of his guilt?
So there is no need for me to argue because you already made your decision and there is no turning back?
So now, what are my options if any?
You can send feedback to the Site Admins using the link at the bottom of the page.