Is 91.1 accuracy normal?

Hi everyone. I was going thru my analisis and had 91.1 accuracy. Is this bannable? (I have 400 ELO)

Wait 82 Accuracy and BANNED? wth man

No, 91 is not automatically bannable. There are lots of factors that go into determining whether an engine was used in a game. Factors like time used, correlation with engine, whether the move is even findable for a human. One game in a vacuum won't get you banned, unless it's blatantly obvious to the site.

I once got 91% accuracy and not banned yet. Maybe your ban was for a different game.

(My rating is 600)

It is if you cheated to get it. Otherwise, chess.com will find nothing and you'll be fine.

Yes, this is normal when your opponent makes an obvious mistake early on and you take advantage of it (usually also obvious). In these cases, it's not that hard to get 90+ accuracy at any level assuming you know how to play chess.

depends on the amount of moves and how your opponent plays, it is def possible

@DesperateKingWalk

the opponent might have made the best moves easy to find, while if op plays against carlsen or firouzja then the centipawn loss wouldve been much higher

if your 400 elo and get 6 brilliant moves probaly bannable but one good game isnt

Then maybe that wasn’t the reason you got banned.

No you won't be banned

What cheat detection software are you running? Is it open source?

The problem with this argument is that in your list of players, you do see those outliers (less than 0.1 cp loss), and you can't just ban a player (titled or not, 500 or not) for one outlier game. I've had three games in the last month with over a 90% accuracy. Granted, they were at most 30 moves, but pointing out that one game is an outlier isn't a bannable offense.

They didn't ban Niemann for just one game that was questionable, but for many games. There were also more factors than just how accurately he played. Chess.com does clock analysis to see how much time is being spent on different moves and even browser analysis to see if you're switching to a different application or window and how accurate your moves were after that delay.

When I took a look at the game posted by the OP, I thought most of the moves were reasonable and findable. In fact, many were just downright forcing moves like the queen and rook trades. There's probably a lot of room for interpretation on that game above. All this to just say, there's a lot more that goes into determining if a game was a violation of fair play than how low the error rate was, and chess.com has people review every case before banning anyone.

Me personally yes it is

That's super cool, thanks. I guess my point above is really just what's included in your own post:

A low value in an individual game is not proof of cheating.

Cool cool. That's really interesting about how closely it matches the computer lines as in top 3 suggested moves. Seems like a pretty strong factor to include.

I must have been unclear in what I said though. Chess.com doesn't only use the centipawn analysis. There's a lot more that goes into it, like the other things I mentioned.

I think we're on the same page though that if we think a player cheated, we'll just hit the report button and trust the chess.com team to figure it out!

Ah, sorry. Must have missed it in the wall of text!

That would be cool to see, though with so much info there, my eyes glazed over just looking at it. Any chance you'll post something that would be easier for a simpleton like me to look at?