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

Only Chess Forum

  1. 07 Mar '08 15:17 / 4 edits
    Much to my surprise, I recently found out that someone who was 3b'ed from this site has returned with a new ID and is seemingly playing normally and without cheating (his new rating is around 1500, compared to 2000+ before). This doesn't seem to be a secret, he started a public thread announcing his return (I missed it at the time) and he seems to have the approval of the owners of the site.

    Similarly, unless I misunderstand the rules there, the ICC has a policy of warning people who have been caught using engines rather than banning them straight away.

    Do people think this would work on this site? Strangely enough I think I would be reasonably happy playing someone who had been caught cheating as they would probably be on their best behaviour. However if it was someone who had cheated against me, causing me to waste hours of my time playing a pointless game against Fritz, then perhaps I wouldn't be so magnanimous.

    If the warning was done privately it might give cheaters a way to reform without the public humiliation that being 3b'ed carries now.
  2. Standard member HomerJSimpson
    Renouned Grob Killer
    07 Mar '08 15:20 / 2 edits
    Thread 82784

    Are you even sure the admins know about this? He didnt say he was allowed back and its not like he's using his old account.
  3. 07 Mar '08 15:34
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    Much to my surprise, I recently found out that someone who was 3b'ed from this site has returned with a new ID and is seemingly playing normally and without cheating (his new rating is around 1500, compared to 2000+ before). This doesn't seem to be a secret, he started a public thread announcing his return (I missed it at the time) and he seems to have the ...[text shortened]... t give cheaters a way to reform without the public humiliation that being 3b'ed carries now.
    Once a cheat always a cheat.

    Why ban them and allow them back?
  4. 07 Mar '08 15:34
    Thanks for fixing that. I spent a long time looking for tournament 82784, then I had the brainwave that you must have meant user 82784, but no luck there either!

    I'm sure he would have been reported by now, so I assume he is here with the approval of the site owners. He is a subscriber and he has rejoined his old clan (Twin Peaks).

    What do you think though, should reformed cheats be allowed back or should they be ostracised for life? I must admit I'm leaning towards patting them on the head and warning them to behave from now on.
  5. Standard member HomerJSimpson
    Renouned Grob Killer
    07 Mar '08 16:04 / 1 edit
    The guy was rated 1000 if you rewind exy's graph all the way to the beginning, he (phexeen) was rated at 1600 before he unnaturally decided to destroy his rating. Game 4408780 Does that look like a 1600 player? I mean a 1600 here could probably give an 1800-2000 a run for their money, and make them pay if they make a mistake, I just think his rating should closer to 1000 than 1600.
  6. Standard member Phlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    07 Mar '08 16:34
    Originally posted by HomerJSimpson
    The guy was rated 1000 if you rewind exy's graph all the way to the beginning, he (phexeen) was rated at 1600 before he unnaturally decided to destroy his rating. Game 4408780 Does that look like a 1600 player? I mean a 1600 here could probably give an 1800-2000 a run for their money, and make them pay if they make a mistake, I just think his rating should closer to 1000 than 1600.
    Agreed. Having used an engine for your games doesn't equal 'having studied'. I've been from 1350 to 1500 and back and up... It insults my sensibilities to think someone went up 600 points by having watched an engine make their moves.

    P-
  7. 07 Mar '08 21:43
    Originally posted by Fat Lady
    Much to my surprise, I recently found out that someone who was 3b'ed from this site has returned with a new ID and is seemingly playing normally and without cheating (his new rating is around 1500, compared to 2000+ before). This doesn't seem to be a secret, he started a public thread announcing his return (I missed it at the time) and he seems to have the ...[text shortened]... t give cheaters a way to reform without the public humiliation that being 3b'ed carries now.
    Cheaters should be banned permanently. I have no pity for anyone who cheats, and cheaters ought to be humiliated.
    You should be more concerned for the players that were defeated by this cheater's use of computer programs.
    Where's your sense of justice?
  8. 08 Mar '08 20:17
    Originally posted by Ben USN
    Cheaters should be banned permanently. I have no pity for anyone who cheats, and cheaters ought to be humiliated.
    You should be more concerned for the players that were defeated by this cheater's use of computer programs.
    Where's your sense of justice?
    Well said.

    Incidentally, which movie is that black & white still from (on the Golden Muggers page)?
  9. 09 Mar '08 01:15
    Originally posted by Mark Adkins
    Well said.

    Incidentally, which movie is that black & white still from (on the Golden Muggers page)?
    Thanks Mark!

    The pic is E. G. Robinson and his scurvy crew, from Key Largo.
  10. 09 Mar '08 08:05 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Ben USN
    [b]Cheaters should be banned permanently. I have no pity for anyone who cheats, and cheaters ought to be humiliated.
    Why ? even FIDE doesnt do the same with cheaters on tournaments ... the first time they are suspended for a while and then they could return , it wouldnt be the same on RHP ?
  11. 09 Mar '08 19:46
    How about this: Suspend the cheater for a year and make him or her pay a $200 re-instatement fee if he or she wants to come back. If he or she cheats again, the new suspension is for life. RHP keeps the $200 no matter what.
  12. Standard member Crowley
    Not Aleister
    09 Mar '08 20:27
    Originally posted by gaychessplayer
    How about this: Suspend the cheater for a year and make him or her pay a $200 re-instatement fee if he or she wants to come back. If he or she cheats again, the new suspension is for life. RHP keeps the $200 no matter what.
    The people who return just won't say who they are then. At least now the handful who have returned with hat in hand did it above board.
  13. Standard member HomerJSimpson
    Renouned Grob Killer
    10 Mar '08 16:39
    holy smokes he's got a 135 games in progress
  14. Subscriber Very Rusty
    Treat Everyone Equal
    10 Mar '08 16:48
    Originally posted by HomerJSimpson
    The guy was rated 1000 if you rewind exy's graph all the way to the beginning, he (phexeen) was rated at 1600 before he unnaturally decided to destroy his rating. Game 4408780 Does that look like a 1600 player? I mean a 1600 here could probably give an 1800-2000 a run for their money, and make them pay if they make a mistake, I just think his rating should closer to 1000 than 1600.
    I don't think you can tell anything from just one game....I know I have made some bonehead moves in games, and lost a couple of minor pieces before move 18, which should never happen.
    Game Load and being over tired can sometimes contribute to " Idiot Moves"....Dang I should have thought of that one for a name....People are getting on me for very rusy...not that I can blame them, but it seemes like a good choice in 2006 after a 10 year abscense from the game.
  15. 10 Mar '08 16:53 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by HomerJSimpson
    The guy was rated 1000 if you rewind exy's graph all the way to the beginning, he (phexeen) was rated at 1600 before he unnaturally decided to destroy his rating. Game 4408780 Does that look like a 1600 player? I mean a 1600 here could probably give an 1800-2000 a run for their money, and make them pay if they make a mistake, I just think his rating should closer to 1000 than 1600.
    I'm glad you can take one blundered game and tell us all what his real rating should be.

    Quick players are erratic. Exy is a quick player. You may be of the opinion that he should be rated 1000 but I have played many games with him and know this not to be true. He's just prone to the odd blunder, as we all are.


    EDIT - Looks like Very Rusty beat me to it.