The curse of a site like RHP is engine users who cast doubt on the credibility of the site and must discourage many people from joining in the first place. The vast majority of identified engine users are in the above 2000 rating bracket. The number of people who currently have this level of rating is only just over 100 people and I would expect that virtually all of them must have some form of track record in chess that has not been achieved through correspondence play. Therefore, in order to discourage engine users why not ask any person who achieves a 2000 rating to provide some form of credential that demonstrates that they are who they say they are and that their chess achievements are commensurate with achieving a 2000 rating? Any player who provided this evidence could be given an accredited status that would give potential opponents the confidence that they were in fact playing against a fellow human. The system could be voluntary but opponents would be able to take a decision on whether they preferred to play against accredited or unaccredited opponents.
Originally posted by charles d The curse of a site like RHP is engine users who cast doubt on the credibility of the site and must discourage many people from joining in the first place. The vast majority of identified engine users are in the above 2000 rating bracket. The number of people who currently have this level of rating is only just over 100 people and I would expect that virtu ...[text shortened]... take a decision on whether they preferred to play against accredited or unaccredited opponents.
Some people are who they claimed to be, but still decided they needed to use an engine to play chess here.
There is no way to say any user here DOES NOT use an engine, so we remove them as we find them.
Not a bad idea, but it can't work the way it needs to work here finding engine users.
Some users here have been asked who they really are when they reach a high rating. Chances are if you are a cat-lady living in a trailer park someplace in the mid-west USA you are not going to have a rating of 2248 or so.
Originally posted by Phlabibit Some people are who they claimed to be, but still decided they needed to use an engine to play chess here.
There is no way to say any user here DOES NOT use an engine, so we remove them as we find them.
Not a bad idea, but it can't work the way it needs to work here finding engine users.
Some users here have been asked who they really are when the ...[text shortened]... iler park someplace in the mid-west USA you are not going to have a rating of 2248 or so.
P-
It was the deterrence factor I had in mind - engine users must be abnormally concerned about achieving a high rating and if they know that they are going to have to demonstrate that they can actually play chess once they achieve that high rating then it may put them off playing on the site in the first place.
Originally posted by charles d The curse of a site like RHP is engine users who cast doubt on the credibility of the site and must discourage many people from joining in the first place. The vast majority of identified engine users are in the above 2000 rating bracket. The number of people who currently have this level of rating is only just over 100 people and I would expect that virtu ...[text shortened]... take a decision on whether they preferred to play against accredited or unaccredited opponents.
i think you've made the mistake in persuming only a player above 2000 is cheating... there is nothing stopping a player with any rating from cheating at the odd occasional game, it may just be to cheat in order to find the best move under a particular complex game; i wouldn't play a player with a rating or 2000+ anyway - i would expect to lose whether he cheats or not. surely if a player is that good, even if his opponent was cheating the player could still give him/her a good run for their money... not that justifies cheating. i only have limited experience of r.h.p but so far it all seems very fair and above board. there'll always be a few though who'll want to spoil it for everyone else
I like the way freechess.org handles engines. They allow them, but only a limited number, mostly to developers of the engines, and each engine player is highlighted very prominently so people aren't getting into matches without knowing they are computers.
It gives the developers a chance to showcase their engines, without disrupting their user base.
But I'm not aware of any site that allows engines to be used in a correspondence style. I sure wish RHP would add similar functionality.
Originally posted by joneschr I like the way freechess.org handles engines. They allow them, but only a limited number, mostly to developers of the engines, and each engine player is highlighted very prominently so people aren't getting into matches without knowing they are computers.
It gives the developers a chance to showcase their engines, without disrupting their user base.
...[text shortened]... gines to be used in a correspondence style. I sure wish RHP would add similar functionality.
Russ has said in the past that he doesn't want engines (even labelled ones) playing here. And even if RHP did allow labelled engine users that wouldn't stop the people who cheat using engines.
Originally posted by joneschr I like the way freechess.org handles engines. They allow them, but only a limited number, mostly to developers of the engines, and each engine player is highlighted very prominently so people aren't getting into matches without knowing they are computers.
It gives the developers a chance to showcase their engines, without disrupting their user base.
...[text shortened]... gines to be used in a correspondence style. I sure wish RHP would add similar functionality.
You can let your prog do battle with my Fritz in the PlayChess engine room. If I want to play a human being I come here, if i want to play a program I play with GNUChess or Fritz. There is no point in a user misrepresenting himself especially when people pay money to be here.
That is why the likes of PlayChess only allow engines in the engine room and ban users who flout this rule.
I think you guys should let this go. There's no way to prove you are a human playing and not getting a machine to decide the moves for you.
I cannot see the point in cheating like this. I can see less point in playing games this slowly and having it done for you by a machine. The cheats you want to watch for are those with multiple accounts playing themselves to get their rating up. That's a far quicker way.
Surely we play for the satisfaction. And if we come up against someone that beats us - either human or machine - we learn from the mistakes.
Just because someone has a good rating does not mean they cheat.
Anyway, if you are no good at chess it's like you can brag about a good rating in the real world. You'd soon be found out.
Originally posted by LynxEffect I think you guys should let this go. There's no way to prove you are a human playing and not getting a machine to decide the moves for you.
I cannot see the point in cheating like this. I can see less point in playing games this slowly and having it done for you by a machine. The cheats you want to watch for are those with multiple accounts playing thems chess it's like you can brag about a good rating in the real world. You'd soon be found out.
Identifying engine users
14 Feb '07 15:07
Back to Top