Originally posted by JulyDerekNo, its not easy to tell. Assuming they are 'good' cheaters, and they use Fritz or a comparable top engine, you will just get wiped out by them pretty soon into the middlegame.
Hi,
I know that not only it is stupid playing with the help of a Chess engine here (might as well not play here), but it is also very much against the rules. Any way to figure out if someone is doing that?
Regards,
Derek
Unless you are rated over 1850/1900, then you might hold on for a bit, or you are rated over 2000/2100, in which case you might hang on for a bit longer. Or you are an IM / GM, in which case you might give it a game - even beat it if you are playing a blinder.
Send feedback if you genuinely think you are being played by A.I., but do take care with this accusation. Many players on this site are most probably just much better than you. I think that there are as many sore losers here as there are cheaters. Some just think everyone who beats them must be cheating 🙂
Originally posted by PolicestatePS the reason you send feedback is because the moderators have methods for assessing engine use, but like I said, it is not easy
No, its not easy to tell. Assuming they are 'good' cheaters, and they use Fritz or a comparable top engine, you will just get wiped out by them pretty soon into the middlegame.
Unless you are rated over 1850/1900, then you might hold on for a bit, or you are rated over 2000/2100, in which case you might hang on for a bit longer. Or you are an IM / GM, i ...[text shortened]... losers here as there are cheaters. Some just think everyone who beats them must be cheating 🙂
Originally posted by JulyDerekThey usually play E5 followed by Nc6 as black against E4 Nf3
Hi,
I know that not only it is stupid playing with the help of a Chess engine here (might as well not play here), but it is also very much against the rules. Any way to figure out if someone is doing that?
Regards,
Derek
The fact that he hasn't played many moves doesn't make it a bad question. It's the kind of thing you'd naturally be curious about when starting to play here.
One way to look at it is if you're playing people with moderate ratings (1600s or whatever), it's not really possible for them to be cheating--if they are, they're doing it so rarely that it hardly matters--otherwise their rating would have to go up. That's assuming, of course, they're not in the process of skyrocketing to the 2200+ level--which is why I think it's a decent idea to look at people's rating graphs and see if they look "plausible" if you're accepting an open invite, etc.
But to answer the question, you can't really tell easily on your own if someone is using an engine. I mean, you could just compare their moves to Fritz and other engines, etc., but your conclusions might not be too accurate. Which is why you pretty much just have to report any suspicion to the admins and let them deal with it.
Originally posted by wormwoodI agree. A weak player needs to use an engine all the time, a strong player does not need to use it.
a weak player can't tell when the position gets tough. when he realizes he's in trouble, it's already too late.
So it is pretty easy to tell the weak players engine use as he plays all his games like an engine and sooner or later makes an elementary, give away, mistake because he knows no better.
If a strong player uses an engine how can you tell. The short answer is you can't! The long answer is to imagine why he would use it - not to select his moves as he doesn't need that so why? To blunder check his moves, i.e. he selects them himself then checks them with an engine and, unless they are seriously bad, makes them. Such a player never blunders! Strong human correspondence players (I am talking IM level here) rarely blunder but they do blunder.
The degree of blunder differs from us mere mortals. We may consider a blunder as leaving a queen en prise whilst they would consider a move that lost a pawn 4 moves into a combination a blunder.
I very much doubt whether most players on this site could pick up such engine use.
Originally posted by backfrom1994A very strong indication of engine use as humans don't improve that much instantly but rather make a more gradual stepped improvement over a considerable time.
how about someone who played hundred games with 1500-1600 rating and then stop losing to reach 2200+?🙂
Originally posted by Dragon Firefunny you'd be the first to make note of that, as you must have the flattest graph I've ever seen on this site...
A very strong indication of engine use as humans don't improve that much instantly but rather make a more gradual stepped improvement over a considerable time.
Weyerstrass's isn't even that level! Impressive!