If you subject your games to computer analysis you can easily discover wheher the opponent's moves are suspicious. I have lost to several lower players due to my own oversights and can't identify one instance where I suspected cheating.
I do wish the computer analysis were better, though. It keeps giving me ?? when I choose a clear win that is not most efficient and misses obvious strategic errors.
not worth stressing over.
They are working hard to remove cheaters. Be patient.
The biggest cheater has returned: => cheater_1
ADK
There's a reason why someone is rated 300 points below you: it's because they are NOT AS GOOD OF A PLAYER AS YOU ARE.
This is the biggest load of crap I've ever read. So you are saying if you have an 1800 rating and play avg opponents of 1250 that you are better than a player with 1500 rating who plays 1650 avg opponents! NO it means the higher rated player plays and beats weak players and the lower rated player beats and loses to players around his "REALISTIC" rating
how do they cheat?
I'm sick of cheaters on chess.com. Now and then I get beaten by some guys 300 or more points below me, not taking advantage of my blunders but outplaying me tactically and strategically on my good day. Come on people, that really sucks and it's getting on my nerves. On playchess.com cheaters are constantly detected when using computer assistance and sanctioned by deleting his/her elo points but on this site - never. Someone should do something about it...
If your rating was 1900 or something like that... But at our level we do many blunders we don't even see.
No way Duffer man, I'm not back peddling just trying various techniques bro. But since you are my kind of SOB (due to your profession) you don't fall for pretty words. C U in hell. Over & out
Ratings measure results not ability – Prof. Arpad Elo. For an extreme example of this Google the name Claude Bloodgood.
"No way Duffer man, I'm not back peddling"
A laughable comment really, as just about everything you said was back peddling after your initial post. Allow me to show you.
You wrote "I'm sick of cheaters on chess.com. Now and then I get beaten by some guys 300 or more points below me, not taking advantage of my blunders but outplaying me tactically and strategically on my good day." This is an unambiguous statement, and can only be read to mean - 'I have been outplayed on more than one occasion by people on Chess.com who I am positive are cheating. They haven't won due to me making errors, they have outplayed me when their rating is lower than mine, therefor they must be cheating.'
Your initial comment really can't mean anything else. So with that in mind (I.E. You are positive that you have played games on numerous occasions in which you have made no mistakes and people have cheated to beat you) let's see what your next comments are and see whether any 'back-peddling' has gone on...
You wrote "I'm not accusing anybody particular because I can't prove cheating on this site" This is clear back peddling. You were 100% adamant that you had been cheated and now you say that you are not sure.
"it would probably take days to find and analyze them all." A ridiculous comment really. Chess.com has an excellent interface for searching your game history. The task of finding an appropriate game to post would take a maximumof 2 minutes.
"I'm aware that I probably made some (not so obvious) blunders in those games" - easily the clearest example yet. To begin with, you were outplayed. Now you admit that you could have committed some blunders. Back peddling? You appear to be backing up a hill here, rather than just back peddling.
And then you finish with " I just want to say that sometimes I get a feeling that I'm being duped and I'm rarely wrong when my alarm goes off." Which changes your position once again back to your original post. Basically, you are saying 'I am positive people cheat me, but I can't prove it, and I know that they might not be cheating, but they definitely are cheating, and I'm not going to provide anything in the way of hard facts to support any of my wild assertions. I can't prove people are cheating me, but my 'alarm' makes me certain that they are. Also, I am absolutely brilliant, so there is no other way I could lose.'
You then finish with a glorious non-sequitur (a point that doesn't logically follow in your argument) "And what else to assume when I witness cheaters being detected constantly when playing on playchess.com" So you are saying that because there is evidence of people cheating on Chess.com in general, this must mean that whenever you lose, you must assume that you too are being cheated?
You are a fool.
Don't twist my words Hofstader, I've never said that people cheated on me whenever I lost a game. I assume you must be one sorry, pathetic 2nd class cheater to be so insulted like that, because someone posted something few days ago because he was bored and figured out that a topic on cheaters could stirr things up. I can't believe you people, some of you are being incredibly stupid and tiring, open your window and take a deep breath sometimes, hypoxia can damage your brain. This is my last post on this subject. Over & out (again)
It is you being incredibly stupid and tiring. This topic comes up over and over again...but it is always in the same format. A sore loser who has just been beaten a couple of times puts a topic up claiming that people have been cheating them...people from chess.com genuinely want to help so ask for the games to be posted...then the original poster retracts his initial statements because he has managed to get over the fact that he lost, and also realises that he wasn't cheated.
I do, however, agree with you one main point - these arguments are tiresome and pointless. However, had you posted some ACTUAL EXAMPLES of the things you were originally moaning about, then none of this argumentative back and forth would have happened.
For the record, I didn't mean to suggest that you thought you were being cheated whenever you lost, and I apologise if that is how I cam across.
Why don't you just post a couple of links of the instances of when you have been cheated and we can all be friends?
Fool.
By the way, before you post again, I fully intend to simply answer any reply you have with another request for you to post links to games where you think you have been cheated. We both know you can't do that, so it would quicker in the long run if you just admitted it.
People don't have to cheat just to purely win. I'm sure people cheat to maintain a certain rating they're comfortable with. Like they like the idea of being 1400, so if the rating dips too low, they'll just guarantee a few wins to pad the score. It's not like every cheater wants to be over 2000. That'd just be kind of suspicious, since I'm guessing like maybe 1% of the population is rated that high. And they have a deep understanding of the game that a cheater just couldn't explain.
And yes, ratings DO MATTER. There's a reason why you're rated a certain way, because the PEOPLE RATED HIGHER THAN YOU ARE BEATING YOU ON A CONSISTENT BASIS. Don't dismiss ratings so quickly on the account that you win or lose one game to someone +/- 200.
Ratings do honestly reflect playing strength to a pretty good degree. Of course nothing is perfect. And ratings change FAST. If you did 500 tactical problems between last week and now, I'm sure you're going to play a lot better, probably rated anywhere from 25-100 points higher.
But as a someone who plays at clubs and tournaments. I have a decent feel for the game. I know what kids play like. I know what amateur adults play like who are rated less than 1200. They drop pieces within the first 10-15 moves like 90% of the time. I know what a 1600 and 1700 and 1800 plays like. 1800 play is pretty painful. You have to ambush them with 3-4 move combos a good amount of the time, and that's just to win a pawn! I know what 2000-2200 plays like. They have a DEEP understanding of the game. I'm happy if I can make it 25 moves into the game without resigning.
To play someone at LIVE CHESS that's 1350 and watch them open like a grandmaster is JUST RIDICULOUS!
To watch someone that's 1150 hang a Bishop in the first ten moves, and then tighten the screws on you is a little baffling sometimes.
I'm not saying that cheating is everywhere. But it's a lot more prevalent than people give it credit for. It's just like high school and college. Parents and teachers WANT to believe that cheating is minimal. But kids cheat ALL TIME IN SCHOOL. A lot play by the rules. But don't be fooled. When it's easy to cheat and unlikely that you'll get caught, people do it.
Opening like a grandmaster is something that every paying member of this site should do since they have the database at hand to research and plan all of their opening moves. Of course that is not permitted in live chess but I'm sure plenty of members memorise many moves. After playing the same opening moves several times and becoming familiar with the positions, it is not hard to then play 10 moves without significant thought, providing there is nothing unfamliar coming from the other side of the board.
I find it hard to believe that there are many 1400 rated players cheating to stay at that level. I'm not saying I totally disagree since I accept the possibility, but surely everybody realises that their current rating will improve through study and practice. I do believe that people cheat to attain a high rating, and to 'win'. However I can't imagine many people that are at an average or below average level, cheating rather than tring to improve. Their scope for improvement is surely huge! Why would anybody cheat to a low level?
I agree with a previous thread; anybody who only attains 1400 using Fritz is a complete idiot!!
Don't twist my words Hofstader, I've never said that people cheated on me whenever I lost a game. I assume you must be one sorry, pathetic 2nd class cheater to be so insulted like that, because someone posted something few days ago because he was bored and figured out that a topic on cheaters could stirr things up. I can't believe you people, some of you are being incredibly stupid and tiring, open your window and take a deep breath sometimes, hypoxia can damage your brain. This is my last post on this subject. Over & out (again)
We can all hope it is his last post on this topic. Nice posts, by the way, Hofstader. I also asked for him to post some of these games in which he was supposedly cheated and -- surprise, surprise -- none were forthcoming. Then of course as seems to be the usual tactic with this sort of thread, he has to turn things around and everyone who is questioning him is somehow an idiot.
All in all, quite unimpressive.
just because someone is 300 points below you doesnt mean that they cant outplay you if e.g. they get a position from the opening that they like to play. ratings can vary a lot - mine has swung between 1781 and around 1570. maybe there are some 1700 players who were surprised at being beaten by a 1570 player. also maybe they just joined the site and their rating is still climbing to its correct level
yeah, people at the lower levels are inconsistant to the point where one has a good game and the other doesnt and an easy upest it is. i know a guy in real life thats chess knowledge is very good, but makes a horrible blunder in about 75% of his games. some games you play him and expect to wash him over , but then the blunder doesnt come and you realize youre in a battle for your life.
what worries me here is the super high players that dont have even an FM tag. a lot of this consistancy against super competetion even a GM would not be able to take these guys down game after game..
Cheating at chess...using a chess computer...is the same as saying your a qualified rocket scientist. It only works till you play someone over the board at a tournament...or...get a job as a rocket scientist...and then its...duhhhhhhhh ?Nothing can be learned by cheating at chess. Only an idiot would go to those extremes....to get his jolly's....using a high tech chess computer...to beat someone at a meaningless game ( chess for fun on the internet ). Join the USCF United States Chess Federation for your ( in person ) chess playing games if your serious about every game you play. The internet will always have a few cheaters in some way / shape / or form...usually... if theres is money involved.
OK I'll repeat, you missed the point:... "not taking advantage of my blunders but outplaying me tactically and strategically on my good day..."
Agent, please put up or shut up. Post one of these games for the community to look at. You want someone to be publicly humiliated, well here's your chance. You assure us that you're just being outplayed when you've made no blunders. Well, post the games, or please, keep it between you and your therapist.
Dear Duffer 1965, no need to be rude, we can discuss this issue in a friendly manor; I'm not accusing anybody particular because I can't prove cheating on this site. And as for my games - it's been a while since I suspected someone cheating, so I really don't feel like tracking those games, it would probably take days to find and analyze them all. Also I'm aware that I probably made some (not so obvious) blunders in those games considering that I'm still a beginner. I just want to say that sometimes I get a feeling that I'm being duped and I'm rarely wrong when my alarm goes off. And what else to assume when I witness cheaters being detected constantly when playing on playchess.com... That's all
For the record, I think your posts were rude and arrogant.
I do like the speed at which you've back peddled from your strident early position. I've noticed that there have been quite a few people who bluster like Pistol but when called on to substantiate the blustering, don't produce anything except back peddling.