Response from Caught Cheater - Worth Reading

End point: Chess.com has banned the concerned account.

Forgiving: that's up to each individual's philosophy in life.

Forgetting: same as the Forgiving part.

Point of this thread: Cheat, and thine account shall be closed.

What is curious is that Lizard - at 2400 I think - was banned, but there are more obvious cheaters than him, some at 2800 and above, who are tolerated. Quite strange...

Hmm... let's say that from the first 50 players, I think that 3-4 might not be cheating. And I am 100% sure that the rest do cheat :)

Well, you can play high quality chess, even an amateur rated like 1800-1900 can sometimes play in a game like a super-gm! That is absolutely normal. What is not usual is to play consistently at gm level while in fact you are an amateur.

Do you think it's normal that Julio Becerra is not even in the top 200 players here?

GOODNESS.

babs, why do you keep calling costelus "caitlin" which is an Irish girl's name? As for his ratio of cheaters at this stage I am beginning ot agree with him whereas before I felt he exaggereated the issue.  At one stage I hit the top 20 on this site with 2500. (a lot more than my best ever performance rating otb).  Now if I hit 2500 again I wouldn't be in the top 200.  At this stage even a professional can't maintain top 200 it seems.  I know, because I'm an example that player A can beat player B who is higher rated OTB by use of dbases, analysis board etc and more care, but not all the time and not so regularly.  The current top guys play faultless, I mean faultless chess, even when checked with an engine, not just  that I can't see the faults, which wouldn't be that meaningful...

and Ashley

What knowledge!!!

 Thanks, I didn't know that was his name as it's not in his profile. 

My name is Catalin :)

As of chess.com, it is a business at the beginning. I understand well why they are reluctant to apply the harsh, even agressive cheating policy from ICC.

 now that's far more manly lol.  Of course costelus could be a woman? 

gracious...  it's so hard to see these people, they're so high up there.

To compare the ratings here and the normal otb ratings is silly.  First of all, with each move made the player is allowed to reference books etc before making their next move, obviously not something GMs in an OTB comp can do.  I am guessing a lot of the 'real' good players play the same way on here as they would OTB, ie no referencing after each move, and do their practice and study in a different manner.  Just a guess.

Also to basically accuse 45 of the top rated players here of cheating is based on nothing and makes you sound like you are acting more out of jealousy than anything else.

I look at someone's Performance Rating in relation to his Average Opponent Rating.

What does this tell you?  People's average opponent ratings can be what they are for a myriad of reasons. 

i feel people who cheat and are caught should be allowed back if they  1.  show genuine remorse,  2.  apologize online  and also apologize by e-mail to all their opponents they beat   and 3. pay a fine to chess.com for taking up time and resources....just thinking outloud here.....

I think that zero tolerance should be zero tolerance.  Making exceptions sets a dangerous precedent -- some people and organizations repeatedly break the law simply because they can afford the penalties and it's worth their while when held up against the benefits of being able to bend the rules.  I don't see officially softening the punitive recourse for an offense as egregious as cheating to be of any benefit.

You're just one of the logical people that are around ilikeflags...

Thank God for people like you...

I think we all must agree, the superior organ of thought is the heart. I feel so good now!