I have the Solution to stop cheating in Live Chess!

Some of the chessmaster personalities make mistakes like this on purpose to give you an advantage to test your endgame skills.  I do not believe a normal version of chessmaster would resign with so much material on the board and still just a piece or so down.

An awefully played game as even with Qg6...Black had an advantage by move 7.

Also remember we are speaking of programs on full strength not Hans

I don't have chessmaster so I can't say I have done the same. The point is the only reason you had fun playing this chess engine was because it was designed to be weaker. More humanlike. Full strength modern chess engines are not fun to play. They just rip you apart if you make any mistakes. 

This has been answered like 20 times...if you can read...look back at older posts.  It is the most obvious question, don't you think someone else thought of it?

Let's wait for the new and improved Live Chess to show. Alot of cheating may be just a bad programing.  A cleaner, faster Live Chess would eliminate faulty disconnections.

Paul211> I have no chess engine but try it if you have one and tell me if the computer did or did not resign or give me a win.

I already told you no official release of Chessmaster Grandmaster Edition has been programmed to resign, and pointed you to four threads on the official forum discussing that. If your copy did, it's hacked or buggy. I just forced these moves on Hans and surprise, surprise--he didn't resign. He plays to checkmate. I wish Chessmaster did resign... that would increase its value as a training tool for intermediate players.

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6 5.Nc3 Qd6 - Hans is programmed to play this 20% of the time, and blunder 10% of the time. Your copy seemed to blunder much more often. Did you get your copy directly from Ubisoft? If so, and this happens consistently, consider installing the v1.02 patch, using a 5-second increment, and/or checking you don't have other processes hogging system CPU and memory.

Paul211> Have you done as well at any level with any chess engine?

I mated Rybka3 in under ten moves at 2000-strength. I play a mean Scandinavian. I reported it to the developer, who fixed it, so current versions are stronger.

Here's the problem. Nobody who cheats play unrated, so you have to make all the Squad games rated, but, most people who they play will be innocent, but lose,  and lose rating points.

I think it would be better if the Squad sought out and played suspected cheaters, thereby confirming that they do cheat.

What if a cheater who uses an engine loses? That gives chess.com flase information. Even an engine can lose to another engine...

My solution would be to randomly pull games and check them with an engine, and see if one player made all his moves according to how a chess engine "thinks" and not how a human thinks.

Once again if a squad member sees a person is not cheating...(E.G loses a piece early...or is playing out of book)...they simply resign the game.

This has been stated now about 25 times.

You are all to "precise".

First of all fix that !##@* BETA that gets disconnected at the most crucial moves.

How does that solve anything? I've still wasted my time playing a cheater. It's no different than any other cheater, since online chess ratings are meaningless.

I think that this method is partly correct but needs a little refinement.  In my opinion the best way to "test" these people is not to play them with a chess engine and see if they draw or win, but to play them with a chess engine running in parallel.  You play your game, but instead of making letting the computer move for you, aka you cheating also, you just play as you normally move.  Use a program such as chess base that allows several engines simutanously.   When you move, you input your move into the board, and wait and see if your opponent moves match the engine.  To keep from cheating yourself, input your move into the game before moving his piece in the engine.   This allows you to play without cheating yourself.  If someone follows one of the engines move for move during the mid game, there is a fairly high chance they are cheating.  Winning or drawing, in my opinion isn't nearly as key to detecting these people as is watching them in the mid game.  Using this system, no body would be cheating and detecting cheating would be more accurate because you would not be just pitting the engine against its self.  You would have to be a fairly good player though to hold your own against an engine long enough to make a good decision. 

Yes, and every time it has remained a bad idea.

I come to chess.com to play games against real people.  I do not want to play against an engine, and I especially do not want to play games against an engine that aren't intended to be finished.

You still aren't understanding that most of us don't care about our rating, we care about playing honest games against human players. 

If I only have time to play one game during my lunch break, I definitely don't want to play half of a game until I'm losing and then have my opponent resign because they didn't actually care about the game in the first place.  That is even worse than playing against a cheater, who will at least finish the game.

In some of my games, a few (or a combination 2-4 moves) match up with the engine. That does not mean I cheat, it just means that I have a good tactical sight, and the ability to calculate ahead. It doesnt mean I had cheated, just understood where I have to move and act in a situation. If they banned you for 2 moves like an engine, many people would be banned, especially in the 2000's who are not cheating, just good.

Dude..... you can't be offended if you don't know. The odds are slim to none that you will ever play against a monitor.

1.   Be happy they are out there.

2.   You've likey already lost to a cheater and were unaware.

3.   The greater good far outweighs the damage your precious ego / self esteem.

paul211> try it if you have one and tell me if the computer did not resign or give me a win.

Paul, I'm not sure why you're re-posting this request since I already fulfilled it above. "I just forced these moves on Hans and surprise, surprise--he didn't resign. He plays to checkmate... If your copy did, it's hacked or buggy... no official release of Chessmaster Grandmaster Edition has been programmed to resign."

I also pointed you to several threads on the official forum discussing this.

If the odds are slim that anyone will ever play a monitor then how effective could the program really be?

From your points you've clearly misunderstood the objections.  Let me clarify:

1. I am happy that they are not out there, and would be very dissapointed if I found out that they were.

2. Entirely possible, although at my level of play I doubt it unless I caught one on their ascent.  It doesn't matter though, because this is completely besides the point.  I take exception to that additude that basically says "You've already been wronged, so you won't mind if we wrong you too."  I do mind. There's no end to what you can rationalize as being "for the greater good" so we should probably stay off of that slippery slope.

3. The objection is not about ego or self esteem, it's about the desire to play honest games where the terms are understood and agreed to at the beginning of the game and adhered to throughout.  It's bad enough that there are a small handful of bad apples out there who would break that trust, I find the idea of chess.com sanctioning this type of deceit among their ranks, under any justification, entirely distasteful.

Bottom line, we should trust the chess.com staff to continue to improve on their current program to detect and eject cheaters without having to resort to such deceitful measures as starting games under false pretenses.  I don't subscribe to the polarized view that it's either this particular solution or accept that you simply can't catch cheaters.  The fact that cheaters are caught and shut down on a regular basis is a testament to the fact that there are other effective means of tackling this problem.

That is a very peculiar approach; "If you win, you must have cheated"

I would prefer the approach similar to that of a thesis presentation. Do analysis.

Choose moves made by the "incumbent  and request the rationale for such moves.

"In that position Fisher never made that move. How did you think that one out?"

On the other hand you never know when you will encounter a savant. Some flare up and then disappear. (Gata Gamsky?)

why does anyone care about cheating online?

let them cheat. get better with them.. go play outside. it's summer

Discussion on this subject should be limited to this topic:

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/chesscom-feature-request-and-wishlist-5

This thread should probably be locked.

Your idea is not worth the effort.  Who cares if people cheat in chess.  I play here so that my over the board game gets better.  I don't sweat a loss, whether my opponent is cheating or not.