Compensation for Playing Cheaters

This site restores rating points lost to a cheater in some circumstances. But, for those of us who prefer to play such tournaments as arena, it is not enough. Every week I face several cheaters. Most are new. There are several simple and logical cures to reduce the number of cheats I face, but chessdotcom refuses to consider these.

Here’s another. The game I played against a cheater would have been a win had my opponent been clean. Instead of simply restoring the points I lost, restore the points and add a bonus. Treat the game as a win instead of merely erasing the lost points. I still invested time in play. I helped you gather data by playing on.

Sure, that would be acceptable. If I want to learn from playing Stockfish, I’ll play Stockfish. The main thing I’m learning is that this site has too many bots.

We should get 40 years of diamond membership, grandmaster title, and 25% of the chess.com company as compensation whenever we lose to a cheater

you don't learn much from being destroyed by a 3000 engine.... the best people to learn from in your losses are people about 200 points higher than you

It’s a good idea but there’s no concrete way to know that you would’ve won, so returning to what you were before is just the safest way to compensate

I agree with this.

In OTB chess, I'm quite certain that if an opponent is disqualified, the other player is given a win.

Chess.com could do the same: if the opponent is disqualified (for a Fair Play violation, for example), the other player should be granted a win - and given points for the win, accordingly.

Nulling the game and refunding the points is a step in the right direction, but it stops short, as it adjusts the ratings as if the game never happened.

It makes more sense (to me) that the cheating player should receive a loss, as they violated the rules of the game.

Compare :

1) When losing on time, the player receives a loss for trying to use more time than is allowed by rules of the game. The other player is granted the win, and given points accordingly.

2) When caught cheating - the violating player should receive a loss for using engine assistance, which is not allowed by the rules of the game. The other player should be granted the win, and given points accordingly.

It's true we learn from losses, but that's not the point that @Ziryab is making.

He's saying that when a player is caught cheating, the cheating player should receive a loss, and the legitimate player should be granted the win (and points should be allocated, accordingly).

Currently, when a cheating player wins a game, the cheating player still retains the win, the legitimate player still retains the loss, and points are nullified, as if the game never happened.

At least the poser who prompted this thread has been removed after cheating so flagrantly that a bot should have got him before we played.
https://www.chess.com/member/s_lolkid

If a player is caught cheating before the game is over then a rated loss is common (an imposed result on a game not yet ended). If the cheating is determined after the game is completed then the result was already assigned. In OTB in the US the result is often nullified to remove the pollution of the cheating results without introducing some new pollution by creating results that did not occur. A number OTB perpetrators have also had to face the Ethics committee and have had their memberships suspended or rescinded (a lot more difficult in person for somebody to get a fake identity, a new membership, and to avoid meeting anybody who knows them by their real name - the relatively small chess community makes avoiding such meetings difficult without relocating to another area and playing only in local events).

this is a great point i never thought about. if the site is gathering data on us, which they certainly are, then you do deserve the points and the gift card. boiling frog can pay the balance for the muffins as you explain to him the idea you are putting forth, since he obviously doesn't understand.

I feel like if this suggestion were to be carried out, it would incentivize people to try to play cheaters, potentially -- like if they face an engine cheater, then try to rematch them etc. Not sure how it balances out with the incentive to get a "win" refund and the uncertainty about whether the cheater will be banned soon, though.

im 940 in rapid and just lost to someone with 200 elo who joined 15 day ago and loses almost all games but not the tournament games.... hmmm. i realy would like my elo back !!

Just report him for not playing fair. You will get back your lost points and he will get sanctioned.

If you are speaking of Elu***********Gw, he seems to have a very high accuracy for a 200 when playing against 1000+. Very suspicious.

But like some users previous said, I want more. Coffee is disgusting, so instead of a $5 Starbucks gift card, I want a new 2025 Chevrolet Equinox!

جامد

What the hell man? The point of your rating is to determine how GOOD you are so they can give you opponents of the same skill level. Nothing else. Not how much you think you deserve or how much time you dedicate to chess. If people are just getting free rating points without actually having the skills to be at that level, they will just lose it and they will have opponents that are better than them. Stop seeing rating as a currency that you earn, its only purpose is to reflect your actual skill level and your idea would not represent that.

The difference being in OTB, they likely give you the win because it ruined an actual important tournament and plus cheating is very rare and they will be banned from coming back. Meanwhile in online chess it is very easy and cheaters can just reopen accounts like crazy, and a good player could fight cheaters quite often and gain like hundreds of rating points every month, which would make their rating very inaccurate and could be abused. Also for your last point, the violating player shouldn't have even been there in the first place (unlike people who lose on time), so yes the game shouldn't have happened, so rating shouldn't be created out of nowhere.

This is the best idea in this thread.