Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    19 Aug '08 18:45 / 1 edit
    Looks like he is gone, banned, looks like. Well I hate to be the one who said 'told you so'.
  2. Standard member Korch
    Chess Warrior
    19 Aug '08 18:46
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Looks like he is gone, banned or just like Akizy, not there because of no moves for 100 days or something?
    He is banned.
  3. 20 Aug '08 00:16
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Looks like he is gone, banned, looks like. Well I hate to be the one who said 'told you so'.
    Don't know who you'd be telling. Everyone knew he was a cheat.
  4. 20 Aug '08 03:13
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    Don't know who you'd be telling. Everyone knew he was a cheat.
    How can one possibly identify a cheat?

    If a software suggests the best possible move and if one comes up with the same move with his/her analysis, will that person be branded as a cheat?

    I am wondering how...!!!
  5. Standard member randolph
    the walrus
    20 Aug '08 03:21
    Originally posted by ram1977
    How can one possibly identify a cheat?

    If a software suggests the best possible move and if one comes up with the same move with his/her analysis, will that person be branded as a cheat?

    I am wondering how...!!!
    If a user has above a 95% matchup to an engine, it's pretty obvious that they're cheating. I think (not sure) that the 15% or so of moves of top players in CC that do NOT match an engine's pick are actually better than the engine's.
  6. Standard member irontigran
    Rob Scheider is..
    20 Aug '08 05:02
    what did seadevils profile say again?
  7. 20 Aug '08 05:53
    Originally posted by irontigran
    what did seadevils profile say again?
    What did it say? Did you see his profile before?!
  8. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    20 Aug '08 06:01
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    Don't know who you'd be telling. Everyone knew he was a cheat.
    Actually, I WAS telling everyone, PM'd my opinion to several dudes, based on what I saw in his profile chart and the level of games he was playing, very few upper ranks, a lot of 1300 players and so forth.
  9. Subscriber sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    20 Aug '08 06:06 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by ram1977
    How can one possibly identify a cheat?

    If a software suggests the best possible move and if one comes up with the same move with his/her analysis, will that person be branded as a cheat?

    I am wondering how...!!!
    It takes a bit of analysis, like you could be using fritz on a 500 Mhz single CPU machine and it will come up with certain moves or you could be using shredder on an 8 CPU monster number cruncher. They will give quite different moves but you have to analyze the same game using both settings before you can say anything about those two, whether a certain game has a series of moves that matches the exact configuration. So it's not a quicky kind of thing. There are dozens of progs out there and a lot of configurations to put each program on so I am suprised they can find a match at all.
    For comparison, take a look at my own profile chart, it's humpy as a camel, I have won 340 games and lost 140 or so. When you look at the cheaters the lines are like almost straight across. Some dudes start out with a bunch of games at like 1400 or something, then they switch over to programs and all of a sudden, their rating goes out the ceiling, so a jagged beginning set of lines on a chart, then a bunch of win win win win win kind of thing has to make you suspicious.
    Conversely, if the dude started out using a prog, his profile will be like a master, will go up to max out at some high number and then suppose he gets a change of heart or his prog dies, and he tries to play the games himself, all of a sudden his rating goes way down, that is also a clue. Just looking at a profile can give you a heads up about the probability of the dude using an engine.
  10. Standard member Dragon Fire
    Lord of all beasts
    20 Aug '08 07:50
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Actually, I WAS telling everyone, PM'd my opinion to several dudes, based on what I saw in his profile chart and the level of games he was playing, very few upper ranks, a lot of 1300 players and so forth.
    I think Fat Lady identified Seadevil as a cheat long before anyone else, seeing as he knew who he really was OTB. I recollect FL telling me about Seadevil well over 12 months ago.
  11. 20 Aug '08 07:55 / 1 edit
    Who'd have thought eh..?
    cludi vs seadevil.
    Engine vs engine.


    I remember being rather *ahem* cynical about this game a while back & several apologists saying words along the lines of "oh yes it's all quite straightforward to a good player with long time controls".



  12. 20 Aug '08 09:37
    Originally posted by Squelchbelch
    Who'd have thought eh..?
    cludi vs seadevil.
    Engine vs engine.

    [GameId "2580860"]

    I remember being rather *ahem* cynical about this game a while back & several apologists saying words along the lines of "oh yes it's all quite straightforward to a good player with long time controls".
    So this game was some kind of engine vs engine?

    Please tell me, what is it with this game that make it suspicios enginge game?

    When I play people way higher my own rating, OTB or CC, I don't understand their moves sometimes, but to suspect that they're using an engine...? Who am I to be the judge of that?
  13. 20 Aug '08 10:10 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    So this game was some kind of engine vs engine?

    Please tell me, what is it with this game that make it suspicios enginge game?

    When I play people way higher my own rating, OTB or CC, I don't understand their moves sometimes, but to suspect that they're using an engine...? Who am I to be the judge of that?
    I don't know about the match-up figures but Black allows White to get 2 queens on the board first, but has the tactics all under control & forces the win anyway.

    Perhaps you're right & both guys who are now banned for engine use both made some sort of gentleman's agreement not to use their engines in that game, but judging from Seadevil's abysmal performance at the British Championships & cludi's jump before I'm pushed antics, I think this is rather unlikely.
  14. 20 Aug '08 10:17
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    Please tell me, what is it with this game that make it suspicious engine game?
    Here is the position after 81.Kf2


    Look at it carefully. Black is a piece up, but White is just two moves from queening and additionally is threatening to capture Black's extra piece with check. Luckily Black can bail out with a perpetual check.

    But instead, Black plays 81. ... Qd5, allowing White to queen two moves before him. He has to accurately calculate that White has no way to checkmate him with his two queens and that eventually his king will find safety and his extra bishop will win the day. You'd have to be a very strong player (which seadevil isn't) to even consider this, let alone have faith that your calculations are correct.
  15. 20 Aug '08 10:38
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    Here is the position after 81.Kf2
    [fen]8/1k1b1Q2/1p2p1P1/6q1/1P1p4/5P2/5K2/8[/fen]

    Look at it carefully. Black is a piece up, but White is just two moves from queening and additionally is threatening to capture Black's extra piece with check. Luckily Black can bail out with a perpetual check.

    But instead, Black plays 81. ... Qd5, allowing White to qu ...[text shortened]... adevil isn't) to even consider this, let alone have faith that your calculations are correct.
    I can see that he did a curious move after your description. But then, he has a rating of 2400+, his moves are very deep.
    What should he do as a natural move in his rating level? I would resign myself, bishop or no bishop...