Trick to drop opponent's connection?

Martine_Stahl your irresponsible communication style has resulted in such comments as Congrandolore  has made above which is of course false and disrespectful to the merits of my concern and obviously you need to polish your moderating skills as it is confrontational and causes such people to misunderstand and make other negative comments as player above has commented which is of course untrue and offensive. But again I think my expectation from this platform is wrong and should had never thought the forum is for discussion or constructive nature. Just forget it it was all waste of time here. Have good day!

"untrue"

Nothing in this last hour has been untrue. All of this information is pulled out of facts that have been found inside your archive. Abandoned games = lost by disconnection pretty much

yes but it was portrayed as if I have abandoned them which is not true. What are you guys a team of defenders. What kind of forum is this? all a team to fend off how the site could be better? what's going on with you guys? Forget it  its all good, this  site has no problems! this does not seem to be a place where information could be shared but all offence and defence! This is not any way to be constructive, the information is not intended as information as it was packaged to discredit rather than used to address the problem what does number of people having abandoned the game played with me have to do with what I was concerned about which was causing the system show my connection is down when it was not  down when I am losing and only when winning. Just let it be I need no more help from this discussion, thank you, have a nice day. This is juvenile , what are you guys, professionals or just here to swat concerns under the rug? forget I even commented anything if that makes all continue the illusion of that these things are not happening at all.

They say that human and koala fingerprints are almost indistinguishable, and perhaps the same is true of intelligence in this case. 

No one is saying things are perfect. There certainly are things that could be made better and the site is working on making the site more robust but it takes time and they have been hit by a double-whammy of growth due to COVID and The Queen's Gambit upticks. Earlier in the year the site posted they were on track to have 10-years of projected growth in a few months time and I'm sure by now that has even been exceeded.

https://www.chess.com/blog/erik/chess-com-during-this-global-stay-home-moment

https://www.chess.com/blog/erik/incredible-second-wave-of-interest-in-chess

Very respectful Strangemover. I guess this is just a team of defenders. or kids having fun. Very unprofessional approach and discouraging from this site to have such moderators with such approach attending to the concerns of players. 

Yes I meant a tiny bit of disrespect I must admit. Things have been explained fully to you by several people which would perhaps indicate that what they are saying is correct and there is no conspiracy afoot to prevent you from winning games of online chess. 

The site calls it "abandoned" in general. Anything relating to disconnecting or "abandoning" the game is laid into this category

As several of us have pointed out, all games where you disconnect are marked as "abandoned".  That does not mean you intentionally abandoned the game, it simply means that, for whatever reason, your connection to the server was lost and was not restored.

Thus, if someone had some trick to force you to disconnect, that is how it would be reported in your archive: lost by abandonment.

You are alleging that there is some way to force you to disconnect, and that people are doing this, and that it only happens when you are winning.  That is why we are looking at games which you have lost "by abandonment" - because that is how such a game would be reported.

You have exactly nine games in your archive that you have lost "by abandonment".  If there is a widespread hack people are using to force their opponent to disconnect, one would expect a large percentage of these to be games where you are winning.  If, on the other hand, it's random disconnections for other reasons, one would expect there to be no particular pattern of disconnects happening mostly when you're winning; it would be more random.

What do we see?

https://www.chess.com/live/game/5915557885 - you just lost a rook and a casual glance might suggest that you had blundered, but actually you've got a deadly winning attack; your opponent likely thought they were winning because of taking the rook, though.

https://www.chess.com/live/game/5913315439 - equal position in the opening

https://www.chess.com/live/game/5558612952 - equal position in the opening

https://www.chess.com/live/game/5474885278 - a totally lost endgame

https://www.chess.com/live/game/5461950572 - equal position in the opening

https://www.chess.com/live/game/5380600009 - equal position in the opening

https://www.chess.com/live/game/5352140570 - a totally lost position

https://www.chess.com/live/game/5305494380 - your opponent had a small advantage

https://www.chess.com/live/game/5305416809 - you had a winning position, although you still had some work to do

So of the nine games that you lost "by abandonment" where a disconnect hack might have been possible, we have the following:

• Two games that were totally lost anyway
• One game where your opponent was up a piece and probably would have won anyway
• Four games that were still in the opening
• Two games where you had a winning position (although in one of them your opponent probably did not realise this)

Thus, if there is a hack people are using to disconnect you when you have a winning position, it has happened exactly twice, and the other seven games must be explained by other random connection issues that have rather oddly never affected you when you were winning (because we're blaming the disconnections when winning on a hack).

Do you see why people consider the random disconnect explanation much more plausible?

There is always a theory and certain analytical approach that may or may not have ended up the way you described however when you have been playing many games within the past hour or two and then the only game that gets disconnected ( on your side) is the one that a higher rank opponent is being overwhelmed and the game looks so interesting and definitely coming to gather with a perfect harmony if the one that suddenly for no reason comes to a disconnection with no reconnection possibility! This can not be just as cut and dry as you are convinced to be. Any how why so sensitive about this observation of mine, let it all go I can see that the system does not like anything negative to be said about it. So be it. I get back to my games!

We're fine with negative things that Chess.com can review and action. We can't do anything about things that simply aren't true, though.

I agree that this conversation is very much at an end, though, so I am now locking it.

David, moderator

You had two games get disconnected yesterday (or at least, two that are logged as "lost by abandonment").  In one you were winning, and in the other you had an equal position in the opening.

But as we pointed out from your game archive, this is not a pattern that you've run into regularly.  If you were running into this all the time when you get a winning position and never in a losing position, you would have a strong argument.  But since it's actually happened more often when you're losing than when you're winning, and since there are other plausible explanations, the other explanations are far more likely.

There is a bug report tool under the Help menu.  When someone finds a real problem, they want to know about it so it can be fixed.

But we also want to address misconceptions and paranoia that results in people putting the blame for a bad experience in the wrong place.

You had a game where you got disconnected.  You believe your opponent was responsible.  But what if your opponent was innocent and instead it was an internet glitch or a server bug?  What if, instead of blaming an innocent opponent you should be blaming your ISP or a bug in the live servers?  By putting the blame in the wrong place, you're not only going to think that an innocent person is a hacker and a cheater (in your case you very appropriately did not name your opponent, but other people who have run into the same issue have not been so careful), you also will not have any idea of how to address the situation going forward.

If the problem is your ISP, you need to talk to them about it.  If the problem is the chess.com live servers, there are some things you can do with your settings that might help, but you could also file bug reports that might help the chess.com developers identify and resolve issues that could cause connections to be dropped and not restored.  If it was a random internet glitch that was not under the control of either your ISP or chess.com (this happens sometimes), it may just be something you need to accept will happen every now and then, although there may be things that chess.com or your ISP will do to make the connection less brittle.

But if you incorrectly blame your opponent, the problem will continue without getting any closer to a solution.

I am a moderator in the Cheating Forum.  This issue comes up occasionally where someone thinks they've been hacked or been forcibly disconnected by their opponent.  I actually wrote a post addressing the issue of what's possible, what's practical, etc.: https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/on-hacking-the-interface-clocks-etc-possibilities-and-practicalities.

It's not that we object to anything negative being brought up.  It's that we want to address the real problem, not necessarily what people think the problem is.