Provisionals

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
You have to encourage new players on the site. And you have to encourage the purchase of stars.

So I do NOT agree with specifying "no provisionals" in the open invites. That's just paranoia.

If you are a "non-p" player, your ...[text shortened]... mplete their games, you can simply specify "pawn-stars only".

Hmmm.....I posted an open invite and stated no provisionals, but got one anyway. And in the interests of RHP decided to play this person. What a mistake, I should have deleted from the start. This is the 2nd time I have come across a blatant computer using cheater. I am having to make sure of a draw now to limit the damage it will do to my rating. I have just sent him a message and an offer of a draw stating that I have no interest of playing against CM9K or Fritz on line, I could do that without logging on to the net. So a bit of advice to anyone thinking about doing their mentoring bit and playing against p players..DON'T!!!. Stick with players where you can see enough of there game history to assess that it is a safe bet that they are not cheaters.

Originally posted by eyeqpc
Hmmm.....I posted an open invite and stated no provisionals, but got one anyway. And in the interests of RHP decided to play this person. What a mistake, I should have deleted from the start. This is the 2nd time I have come across a blatant computer using cheater. I am having to make sure of a draw now to limit the damage it will do to my rating. I have just ...[text shortened]... can see enough of there game history to assess that it is a safe bet that they are not cheaters.

How can you be so sure? What are the signs.

I am glad to see you didn't point them out with a name... I'd like to know How you can be so sure it is a computer????

P-

Originally posted by Phlabibit
How can you be so sure? What are the signs.

I am glad to see you didn't point them out with a name... I'd like to know How you can be so sure it is a computer????

P-

This is the reason why his/her name is not mentioned here, no-one can be certain. But, the fact is this person has had 9 games, won 2 and lost 7. He/she has not played any textbook openings in any of these games, nor was any of the tactics were of any sort of quality, and indeed was timed out of 3 of his games because looking at the signs he was getting well beat, all this against other provisional players and players rated less than 1350. He now plays against me, plays a textbook opening and every single move he/she took thereafter in my eyes emaculate. None of this displayed in any other games. I have been playing against computers since the age of 12, 21 years ago. And its something you get an instinct for. Thankfully this has only happened once before and that guy admitted it to me and his clan leaders what he was doing, which in turn they kicked him out of the clans.
I can't say for definite how I know, a mixture of instinct, and looking at his game history. For someone who has obviously displayed no opening knowledge, midgame tactics or endgame tactics in previous games then displays them pinpoint perfect in the game against me has got to be suspect.
I may be wrong, but I wasn't wrong the last time and I am more certain of it now.

To me this is an obvious case of him/her playing there own game for a few games, spots my open invite, saw that my rating was reasonably high, and then thought that there was a chance of nice easy point gain.

Originally posted by eyeqpc
For someone who has obviously displayed no opening knowledge, midgame tactics or endgame tactics in previous games then displays them pinpoint perfect in the game against me has got to be suspect.
I may be wrong, but I wasn't wrong the last time and I am more certain of it now.

Having checked your public games, there's one that matches the information you've given. I've looked at it, and I don't think your opponent would have made so many mistakes (such as blundering the exchange) if he was using a computer. It seems a very ordinary game to me, with both sides making a mixture of good and bad moves.

Maybe he is a bit stronger than his past performance and provisional rating would indicate. But as you said yourself, he's not played many games, and several were lost to timeouts. I really don't understand why you think this guy is cheating.

Dave

Originally posted by David Tebb
Having checked your public games, there's one that matches the information you've given. I've looked at it, and I don't think your opponent would have made so many mistakes (such as blundering the exchange) if he was using a computer ...[text shortened]... lly don't understand why you think this guy is cheating.

Dave

I have just spent the last 20 minutes analysing the game, and maybe you are right David. I have noticed 2 blundering mistakes on my behalf which I never really noticed through the red mist. I think maybe it was just a touch of paranoia sneaking in there, just still a bit peeved about a previous incident which nearly made me want to leave the site. Anyways my original post was not meant to be accusational towards anybody, it was meant as a warning to peeps playing provisional ratings, that they do not have enough game history to tell you exactly what you are up against.
So, if anyone wants to play provisional ratings great, just be careful because I might have been wrong on this occasion but there are cheats out there.

Thanks David

-Robbo

Originally posted by eyeqpc
I have just spent the last 20 minutes analysing the game, and maybe you are right David. I have noticed 2 blundering mistakes on my behalf which I never really noticed through the red mist. I think maybe it was just a touch of paranoia sneaking in there, just still a bit peeved about a previous incident which nearly made me want to leave the site. Anyways my ...[text shortened]... might have been wrong on this occasion but there are cheats out there.

Thanks David

-Robbo

were'nt we all provees at one time ?