When you suspect a cheater

I recently played a game against a strong opponent, but I got the feeling I was playing a computer mainly because humans have a certain way of playing. 

My solution....I just resigned after 20 moves...not because I was lost, but why give him/her the satisfaction. 

I then checked the game in Rybka 2 and all of his/her moves were top move choices and the last 5 being the number 1 choice. 

Could it have been a human moving...I suppose.  I almost intuitively think it was not though...So F*&% all you cheaters, you know who you are.

You should report them

EDIT: I looked over the person's games and see that they have lost some games.  But I think it was to skip over the cheating detection systems because they were all early losses to high rated players.

I had four moves in the game which the computer analysis gave me (?!) meaning Dubious...All of which he was able to find the best possible refutation.

?!: Dubious move

This symbol is similar to the "!?" (below) but usually indicates that the annotator believes the move to be objectively bad, albeit hard to refute. The "?!" is also often used instead of a "?" to indicate that the move is not all bad. A sacrifice leading to a dangerous attack which the opponent should be able to defend against if he plays well may receive a "?!". Alternatively, this may denote a move that is truly bad, but sets up an attractive trap.

Please report the user using the "Report abuse" link at the bottom of the page. It's not necessary to discuss these issues on the forums.

why can't "these issues" be discussed in the forums?

I thought the forums were for discussing ISSUES.......

I always hope someday to play a game where the comp will approve of all my moves but so far it hasn't happened.

Five #1 ranked moves in a row is highly suspicious though, even many 2500+ players I've battled rarely choose the absolutely best move five times in a row.

Ineresting... but I was accoused of cheating recently for a game.. Because I decided to look at move 5 or 6 for a minute or so.. It sort of hurts because I know I'm thinking out moves and inventive ways to play.

I've yet to play anyone who i suspect of cheating and if they do well its doestnt matter anyways.. I'm not so attached to my rating that I'll punch a hole in the wall but if i do beat their computer then it means you beat a good opponent if the comp is decent.

Is there money on these games or something? This isn't 'real' chess, in that your real name isn't 'imortalgamer' and whomever you played was not whomever they seemed.

Besides, It's virtually impossible to prove someone is cheating on online chess. Circumstantial evidence is all you can really get, unless you actually visit their house.

So why do spend time worrying about it??? Running computer programs on someone else's game? Why not spend that time working on your own?

If you care so much; either play a game with someone face to face, or play online with someone you know.

I don't know what is more pathetic: People who cheat at online chess, or people who act like angry Sherlock Holmes trying to find them.

Get a life.

wow pretty harsh response to someone just talking about how they may have been cheated ^^^^^^

the people who really need to get a life are the ones making fun of people thousands of miles away that they'll never meet........through a box in front of them

Sometimes the best moves are quite easy to see. But, they usually are not. I've had serious doubts as well about many players I've faced, especially those sub 1300 rating, that have smoked the hell out of me. When that happens I check Rybka and in fact many times they chose the best moves, which were not that easy to find. So, they were certainly cheating. No doubt about it.

But, I don't want to become too cynical just because I lose. It's better to give people the benefit of the doubt than become some sour person that can't take a loss. For me it's not about winning or losing--it's all about improving! These cheaters are not improving. How can they? They receive no feel for the game, and when it comes to an OTB encounter you think they're going to have a strategy, or be able to effectively analyse a position? Hell No! Even with their Rybka they don't know what the hell is going on. 

Rest assured that cheaters do know deep down they are pathetic.

haha i liked the last part!!

Or people who write long posts about people who are angry Sherlock Homles trying to catch cheaters.  LOL

You get a life jack ass

maybe the dude was cheating maybe he wasn't.  i don't know.  accusing someone of cheating or even reporting them will ultimately do nothing, especially on this site where even the fixable stuff seems to be ignored by the "staff."  i think its the chance you take when you play online chess.  and let's be honest, chess.com doesn't really care that much if you win or lose here.  they really just want your money.  i dig a lot about this site but the holes are big.

No, it's not suspicious by itself!  I recently reviewed a game by 1600 player against an 1800 player where they both made #1 moves in the middle game for roughly ten moves in a row.  Both cheating? Well, they're odd cheaters because then both players committed a variety of inaccuracies, some quite severe.

Leave the cheat detection to people who have more sophisticated methods than crying foul at 5 good moves in a row.

WhY dO u CaRe! He CaN pOsT wHaT hE wAnTs! If U tHiNk ItS pAtHeTiC tHeN dOnT pOsT a CoMmEnT!!!!!!

YoU gUyS aRe TaKiNg ThIs OvErBoArD! CHILL OUT!!!!

pLuS yOu PrObaBlY sHoUlD gEt A LiFe CuZ u HaVe ThE tImE tO wRiTe A fReAkInG lOOOOOOOOnG coMmEnT! :p

The site serves its intended purpose best when cheating is only a rare event. Thus, the installation of cheating detection algorithms by the owners. Still, no one but the owners are making a living on what goes on here, so putting the outcomes/process of these contests in perspective make sense for most all of us. Inasmuch as I rarely play a game against a player with a high rating, the likelihood of me running into someone using anything more than the occasional open book is fairly low, and my fun quotient remains high.

Word!  I tried to invite you to my group, by the way, but am having technical difficulties.

Really depends on the position.  Navigating perfectly thru a wildly complicated position is very difficult.  Actually, I should say perfectly because machines are not perfect (or they'd never lose to humans or even each other) but for a human to pick the same #1 candidate move as a particular computer engine over & over is very suspicious.  I may play nearly the best move (give or take .01 or .02 points) again & again but I doubt I play the exact same move a computer would play (unless it was a mate in four or something).

Narz: for a human to pick the same #1 candidate move as a particular computer engine over & over is very suspicious.

I agree in general -- I just disagree on the details, specifically what constitutes "over and over"? 5 moves? 10 moves? or something else... I think just looking at some arbitrary number of moves is primitive. I'd imagine a mathetician, statistician, or maybe a good bookie, could work something out that's more elegant, sensitive and reliable.

I was accused of cheating after I did a En passant move before. For which I gave them the link to chess rules.

Bg2 is a complicated move and one not easy to counter.  I could have seen the more likely Qf5 as an answer...but Bf1 is just a computer move bro in my opinion.  Even after all the "hope move" playing as you put it I'm still just a pawn down and the game is unclear.   However, why 18. Rfb1?  Why not Rc1, d1, or e1?  Why would he pick the same move Rybka picked?  I don't know I don't think at an 18 depth level, but there must be a reason. 

Everyone is right though...it doesn't matter in the long run.  Just a game.  P**** me off, but still just a game.  That's why I wrote about it, because writing is a place you can get your feelings out and move on.

edited for language