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

Only Chess Forum

  1. Subscriber no1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    31 Dec '09 14:31
    So says the Forum Moderator.

    Does blatant and obvious cheating being allowed to go on for months and/or years "reflect well on RHP"?
  2. 31 Dec '09 14:34
    Whose name was dragged through the mod???
  3. 31 Dec '09 14:36
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    So says the Forum Moderator.

    Does blatant and obvious cheating being allowed to go on for months and/or years "reflect well on RHP"?
    yes it may be equally counter productive, but what measures are there? i noticed when i was playing blitz as a guest on ICC that someone had their rating instantly reduced for cheating, why is the same mechanism also not available for RHP? is there a vast difference between real-time chess and CC that makes this almost impossible? How does the ICC monitor all those games? It must be through a piece of software.
  4. Forum Moderator
    31 Dec '09 14:40
    The two are completely different things.

    Cheating is against TOS.

    Users with evidence of cheating should use the procedures in place, rather than point the finger in public. Site Admin don't want a name and shame witch hunt in the forums and so accusations are subject to removal.

    If users aren't happy with the procedures in place then suggest new ones or contact Site Admin
  5. 31 Dec '09 14:51 / 1 edit
    But is there really a procedure in place now? How many people have been banned for engine use since the Fair Play Ticket system was introduced?

    It's getting to the stage that when I look through the list of top players it's difficult to find any legitimate ones. There are various very simple signs that a player ought to be looked at more closely, for example:

    1) High match-up over many games with the top move choices of Fritz or other strong engine (all the strong engines seem to choose the same moves most of the time anyway, so it doesn't matter that much which one is used for checking). Is it really likely that there are players on RHP who have a higher Fritz match-up than all of the great World Champions, past and present?

    2) A player who trundles along with a fairly low rating and then suddenly shows enormous improvement.

    3) A player who is known to be of a certain strength OTB but plays to a far higher standard on RHP. Probably the weakest evidence of the three I've listed as some players do play much stronger in correspondence chess, but sometimes the difference is completely unbelievable.
  6. Subscriber no1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    31 Dec '09 15:02
    Originally posted by Forum Moderator
    The two are completely different things.

    Cheating is against TOS.

    Users with evidence of cheating should use the procedures in place, rather than point the finger in public. Site Admin don't want a name and shame witch hunt in the forums and so accusations are subject to removal.

    If users aren't happy with the procedures in place then suggest new ones or contact Site Admin
    (Shrug) Been all through this for years; experience tells me to have no faith in the procedures, if any, put in place by the Site Admins unless their constant failure to punish blatant and obvious cheats is pointed out for the entire community to see. When enough people complain something eventually gets done, like it did with the original establishment of Game Mods and the IM31 banning. But eternal vigilance is required or the Site Admins, who have little understanding of chess themselves, let the situation relapse to one where obvious cheaters are shooting up the rankings charts. This is certainly the case yet again and censoring posts which bring forth compelling evidence of blatant cheating just exacerbates the problem.
  7. 31 Dec '09 15:09
    And what about people who accuse people of cheating at blitz?

    I have been accused a few times of cheating at blitz (incredibly enough) and so now I've decided to only play 1 minute blitz games as it would seem much more difficult for me to cheat using a computer at that speed.
  8. 31 Dec '09 15:15
    Originally posted by homedepotov
    And what about people who accuse people of cheating at blitz?

    I have been accused a few times of cheating at blitz (incredibly enough) and so now I've decided to only play 1 minute blitz games as it would seem much more difficult for me to cheat using a computer at that speed.
    You have creamed me quite a few times there, must've been higher powers behind your mouse
  9. 31 Dec '09 15:24 / 2 edits
    People people, please we are interested in solutions. Obviously the fair play scheme is not working, or is not working to satisfaction, therefore, what alternatives do you propose? i suggest that everyone has a right to be tried by ones peers, therefore a judicial procedure should take place, in public and evidence presented for the prosecution and on behalf of the defence, with, as in Scottish law, a verdict of guilty, not guilty and not proven being rendered through a formal voting system by a jury, picked at random from among the RHP members, who shall look at the case on its individual merits.
  10. 31 Dec '09 15:39 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    People people, please we are interested in solutions. Obviously the fair play scheme is not working, or is not working to satisfaction, therefore, what alternatives do you propose? i suggest that everyone has a right to be tried by ones peers, therefore a judicial procedure should take place, in public and evidence presented for the prosecution and ...[text shortened]... icked at random from among the RHP members, who shall look at the case on its individual merits.
    It's not that the structure of the system is wrong or ineffective. You may come up with the best system possible but unless someone does anything about even the most obvious cases, it's still useless.
  11. 31 Dec '09 15:48
    Originally posted by philidor position
    It's not that the structure of the system is wrong or ineffective. You may come up with the best system possible but unless someone does anything about even the most obvious cases, it's still useless.
    i dunno, this thing must be the scourge of the internet correspondence chess playing community. How does ICC deal with it? As i stated when I was playing blitz a little message appeared on the window saying that someone was a cheat and would have their rating reduced. how does other chess sites deal with it, for there may be a precedent or a system that can be utilised?
  12. 31 Dec '09 15:52
    Originally posted by heinzkat
    You have creamed me quite a few times there, must've been higher powers behind your mouse
    I don't know. Maybe all these zero-sum competitive/adversarial games don't work for me as they seem to trigger bouts of insane rage. I tell myself it's just a game and don't take it seriously and then I end up taking it seriously and getting angry.

    I simply don't have the patience and mental toughness for grueling correspondence or over-the-board games. I like short and sweet games. My attention span is too short, I guess.
  13. 31 Dec '09 15:54
    Originally posted by homedepotov
    I don't know. Maybe all these zero-sum competitive/adversarial games don't work for me as they seem to trigger bouts of insane rage. I tell myself it's just a game and don't take it seriously and then I end up taking it seriously and getting angry.

    I simply don't have the patience and mental toughness for grueling correspondence or over-the-board games. I like short and sweet games. My attention span is too short, I guess.
    Often after only two moves or so against a p1200 I'm already bored and fed up with the game. Talking about a short attention span ........
  14. 31 Dec '09 16:09
    The system for catching cheats has been in place for years.

    If you see someone's name and it has a wee green light next to it
    then they are using a computer - they have to be.

    Robbie, I could not answer you in the other thread because it got stitched up.

    Blitz is banned in Bells because it caused to many fights.
    There are a whole bunch of Bells players barred from Bells, including
    Mrs Greenpawn, for scrapping.

    (Though Mrs GP was banned for refusing to leave when being refused a drink
    'cos she was drunk after attending her works Autumn party - when I'm off to
    Bells I always add; "You coming Dear." which gets me the frosty glare).

    We can talk chess and I can still bring out a board but blitz is frowned upon.
  15. 31 Dec '09 16:40 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    The system for catching cheats has been in place for years.

    If you see someone's name and it has a wee green light next to it
    then they are using a computer - they have to be.

    Robbie, I could not answer you in the other thread because it got stitched up.

    Blitz is banned in Bells because it caused to many fights.
    There are a whole bunch of Bell y glare).

    We can talk chess and I can still bring out a board but blitz is frowned upon.
    my goodness? is it true? how can that be? do they not realise that its a gentlemanly game? they should have a set of flintlock pistols and a set of French foils for anyone caught in ungentlemanly behaviour! if they have a disagreement, then they can take it outside! This naturally would not apply to ladies, their chief reason for being there, to provide décor and tie their handkerchiefs to their favourite players. One must of course applaud the proprietors good sense in not allowing ladies to enter such an establishment, lest they spoil the atmosphere with meaningful conversation and requests for Malibu and pineapple! A place where ones wife is banned? How fortunate! you must have fallen in the Leven and come out with the contract to dredge the place pawn dude!