Who was the biggest cheat?

Originally posted by Korch
I did not say that that short game represent his real strenght. I understand that even the strongest players can have their bad days. It only seems surprising for me that player who is able to make blunders have made zero blunders in RHP.

About being still around - look at User 51824 for example - he have been around for almost 5 years.

Yes, you're right, but let's say that the probability a strong player would commit such blunder is very small - say one case for each several hundred or thousand games. Probably (and this is all speculation) he hasn't played enough games in RHP to reach the blunder threshold.
And quite frankly, it is incomprehensible that the player you indicated could remain undetected(?) for so long. What happened?
He might have started using engines much later. Without knowing his match up rate over the years it's impossible to draw conclusions.
I want to believe that there is equal justice in RHP, and that all players are treated the same way as far as cheating detection and banning are concerned.

Originally posted by smaia
Yes, you're right, but let's say that the probability a strong player would commit such blunder is very small - say one case for each several hundred or thousand games. Probably (and this is all speculation) he hasn't played enough games in RHP to reach the blunder threshold.
And quite frankly, it is incomprehensible that the player you indicated could remain all players are treated the same way as far as cheating detection and banning are concerned.

watching the top level (classical) tournaments, there are always a few braindead blunders even a beginner like me can see straight away. even the very best players are far from infallible, sometimes you just freeze in the most ridiculous ways.

(granted it's far more often I think they blundered, but they were actually right. 🙂 )

Originally posted by smaia
Yes, you're right, but let's say that the probability a strong player would commit such blunder is very small - say one case for each several hundred or thousand games. Probably (and this is all speculation) he hasn't played enough games in RHP to reach the blunder threshold.
And quite frankly, it is incomprehensible that the player you indicated could remain ...[text shortened]... all players are treated the same way as far as cheating detection and banning are concerned.

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"

Originally posted by smaia
Yes, you're right, but let's say that the probability a strong player would commit such blunder is very small - say one case for each several hundred or thousand games. Probably (and this is all speculation) he hasn't played enough games in RHP to reach the blunder threshold.
And quite frankly, it is incomprehensible that the player you indicated could remain all players are treated the same way as far as cheating detection and banning are concerned.

Is not the point here that many of the 2200+ rated players on this site, later proven to be cheats, don't have a clearly identified real life OTB identity.
Mr Weyerstrass is a proven master, who's games are in the public domain, and he loses regularly enough against equally proven opposition otb and on other sites.
I am not sure on what basis Korch, Fat Lady on others, who without wanting to get personal I must observe take paranoia about cheating to a whole new level in these forums, make these clear accusations (which I thought were against the TOS anyway)?
If other genuine players have a higher correlation with Fritz, but are lower ranked, what exactly does Weyerstrass's percentage match prove? I believe that current and ex GMs vary wildly when this calculation is applied. Has no-one ventured that in CC, humans may play more like computers, as more calulation and analysis can take place. No doubt the top CC players make extensive notes detailing their workings out. They are less inspirational, more analysis driven.

I really feel that this argument is being waged on the foundation of two very flimsy statistical observations. First that Weyerstrass has never lost (quite plausable, if unlikely, if he is much better than the others on the site), and second based on an assessment of similarity to Fritz.
If this evidence exists, why has Weyerstrass not gone the same way as Sea Devil and all the others. The answer is that this measure alone is just one variable, and conclusions drawn from it and it alone are deeply flawed.

No one likes a winner I know, but come on people, show some respect.

I would also like to ask why, if Weyerstrass is Fritz, his version is so much better than that used by all the cheats he dispatched. Anyone care to explain why his alleged computer is so invincible in a free market?

Originally posted by Policestate
Is not the point here that many of the 2200+ rated players on this site, later proven to be cheats, don't have a clearly identified real life OTB identity.
Mr Weyerstrass is a proven master, who's games are in the public domain, and he loses regularly enough against equally proven opposition otb and on other sites.
I am not sure on what basis Korch, Fa ...[text shortened]... ispatched. Anyone care to explain why his alleged computer is so invincible in a free market?

Strong human + engine is much stronger than only engine.

Originally posted by Fat Lady
Those statistics were pretty damning. However, what I found more amazing was that some of his opponents had even higher matchups with Fritz - but they still lost!

I think that could be because 1)the method of achieving those statistics ponder for a short amount of time for each move, at least a lot shorter than a serious correspondence chess player/centaur would use, and I guess many cheaters on RHP aren't in real life serious CC player/centaurs.

2)there are significantly stronger engines than Fritz for a few years now.

Originally posted by Policestate
Is not the point here that many of the 2200+ rated players on this site, later proven to be cheats, don't have a clearly identified real life OTB identity.
Mr Weyerstrass is a proven master, who's games are in the public domain, and he loses regularly enough against equally proven opposition otb and on other sites.
I am not sure on what basis Korch, Fa ispatched. Anyone care to explain why his alleged computer is so invincible in a free market?

If I had been fritz, I would probably have plus score (although by a small margin) against normaly 1300 level fritz users on this site.

If I had been Rybka, I would probably have a plus score (although by a small margin) against normally equal level players who use fritz.

with everything else being equal, if I had better hardware and a more serious approach to CC than the other cheaters, I would have a plus score against them on this site.

combine the four, and woila! 🙂

Originally posted by Korch
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"

If this is the case in RHP, then the entire game mod process is rotten in its core.
The credibility of the site depends on whether Equal Justice under the Law is more than an ideal of justice, but the governing principle of the site.

Originally posted by smaia
If this is the case in RHP, then the entire game mod process is rotten in its core.
The credibility of the site depends on whether Equal Justice under the Law is more than an ideal of justice, but the governing principle of the site.

I don't think it's something of this sort. It's always a lot more difficult to identify cheating if the alleged player is in real life a very strong player.

If someone completely anonymous with a nickname consisting of capital letters and strange numbers, and Kasparov would come and play here, having proved his identity, and both use the exact cheating system, I'm sure there would be a serious time interval between the banning of the two, which I find quite normal.

Originally posted by smaia
...The credibility of the site depends on whether Equal Justice under the Law is more than an ideal of justice, but the governing principle of the site.

Rec'd

Just a thought, there are two rules about engine use on this site. The first is that you are not permitted to use them to find moves in an in progress game. The other is that you are not allowed to accuse people of engine use in the forums. Speculating about whether a specific player uses an engine definitely comes under that heading.

The games mods and site admins require a high level of statistical evidence to ban someone. If they do not have that evidence they will not move against them. In the event that they are not acting against a player it could be 1) the player does not use an engine or 2) that they are waiting for sufficient evidence to ban them, as presumably happened in the case of Sea Devil.

I remember the fuss when IronMan31 was banned. People left the site because he was banned and he was blatant. So you are asking for them to act against people on the basis of balance of evidence?

If you suspect a player is using an engine inform the relevant authorities. Do not use the forums accuse specific players of being a cheat. It is reasonable to debate the subject in general terms, but do realize that you are libeling people if you make public accusations on the basis of no real evidence.

Originally posted by DeepThought
Just a thought, there are two rules about engine use on this site. The first is that you are not permitted to use them to find moves in an in progress game. The other is that you are [b]not allowed to accuse people of engine use in the forums. Speculating about whether a specific player uses an engine definitely comes under that heading.

The ga ...[text shortened]... ze that you are libeling people if you make public accusations on the basis of no real evidence.[/b]

if the blatant cheats were banned in a swift manner, I'd fully concur with you. but they aren't. usually it takes some public noise to make the wheels finally turn.

I was always wandering how high rated players can win against cheaters that use engines...so I thought they play in correspondence better than superGMs OTB...because SuperGMs are usually weaker than engines...
Am I correct ? a 2400 on RHP has about the same chess level with an 2800 OTB ???....

Originally posted by vipiu
I was always wandering how high rated players can win against cheaters that use engines...so I thought they play in correspondence better than superGMs OTB...because SuperGMs are usually weaker than engines...
Am I correct ? a 2400 on RHP has about the same chess level with an 2800 OTB ???....

Yeah, but correspondence GM's are way stronger than either.

Originally posted by vipiu
I was always wandering how high rated players can win against cheaters that use engines...so I thought they play in correspondence better than superGMs OTB...because SuperGMs are usually weaker than engines...
Am I correct ? a 2400 on RHP has about the same chess level with an 2800 OTB ???....

your average engine user probably lacks the dicipline to even cheat properly. getting greedy and running through his often gigantic gameload, and even occasionally moving himself thinking 'oh I got this one'. where as the matches with superGMs tend to have huge hardware etc.