I just banned 3 members for cheating. If you are playing fake games, or making fake accounts and resigning games after just a few moves, you will be caught, and you will be banned. There are enough people on this site looking at the top players that if you try it, you will be found, reported, and banned. Simple enough :)

wow my friend thought of doing that and i told him not to because it was cheating and he would be banned and im glad he didnt so thanks for posting that

 

vernon, what kind of friends do you have? :)

What's the point in cheating anyway, not like if there was money or something to be won, no? The only point is playing on this website is improvement  and fun, if there is another rational reason enlighten me, and cheating goes against both. Thus I dare conclude that cheaters are: a) absurd beings b) irrational beings c) unintelligent beings, neither of the three one wants to be.

Anyone who is cheating to get better ELO score will just remain stuck instead of learning and improving. That's a punishment good enough, but the ban would also help!

vernon wrote:

wow my friend thought of doing that and i told him not to because it was cheating and he would be banned and im glad he didnt so thanks for posting that

 

---

 

You should have told him it was stupid and was showing how much of a loser he is. It's a much better reason than saying "you will be caught"... 

man!!!!!!!!!!!!

Awestruck! I can''t believe people would do that crap. I'm sorry that you had to deal with people like that Erik! Its a shame.

Etienne wrote: What's the point in cheating anyway, not like if there was money or something to be won, no? The only point is playing on this website is improvement  and fun, if there is another rational reason enlighten me, and cheating goes against both. Thus I dare conclude that cheaters are: a) absurd beings b) irrational beings c) unintelligent beings, neither of the three one wants to be.

---

Cheaters usually just do it to please their ego. By cheating they win alot of games, which may make them think that they are actually good chess players. Of course there is some very illogical reasoning behind this (since they're not the ones who win, but the computers), but it just makes them think that they're actually good. Wouldn't it make you feel good if your name was on the top players list, with a very high rating, and inbetween players like YelenaDembo or billwall?

messed up peeps!!

Phobetor wrote: Etienne wrote: What's the point in cheating anyway, not like if there was money or something to be won, no? The only point is playing on this website is improvement  and fun, if there is another rational reason enlighten me, and cheating goes against both. Thus I dare conclude that cheaters are: a) absurd beings b) irrational beings c) unintelligent beings, neither of the three one wants to be.

---

Cheaters usually just do it to please their ego. By cheating they win alot of games, which may make them think that they are actually good chess players. Of course there is some very illogical reasoning behind this (since they're not the ones who win, but the computers), but it just makes them think that they're actually good. Wouldn't it make you feel good if your name was on the top players list, with a very high rating, and inbetween players like YelenaDembo or billwall?

---

 Well no if one of these 3 was the cause:

1:If I cheated.

2:If my average opponent was 1200 or so and I just had a LOT of win, and my best win being 1250.

3: If it was not me who played. 

Well like I said, most cheaters don't think rationally like you and me and just like the feeling of having their name up there with the big guys. Also it would make others think you are good, provided of course that people don't find out you cheated.

I agree. Anybody caught cheating should be banned. I've been beaten by very low rated player and I won over some high rated players. So what. If I lose I lose. Isn't that what chess is about anyways? Two people, both in charge of their own chess destiny and the end result. This is the sole purpose I play chess instead of games of chance and team games; I have nobody to blame but myself for my mistakes and I like it that way.

 

Mike

 

Sad but true, it's a fact of life anymore, they want the glory without the work. My question is what about the players who use handhelds or computers to win their games. Anyway to catch them?  ( You know the sad part is, if they put the same thought, effort and time into the game as they do to cheat they might actually learn the game. )

Does anyone think any game before 10 games, that is won on time should be thrown out.  I personally do.  It looks like I am better than I am when people challenge me and 5 moves into it they never come back.

It sounds good but if there's no penalty for timing out people will do it even more, unless the timeout is only registered as the loss for the other player, but then all your effort is for nothing. You suspend a player for a week if he times out but who's to say something didn't happen that was out of his control, internet down, can't pay a bill etc. I think it stinks also but I think it's the only fair solution

I have the same question as phoenixrjp.  What are the rules regarding using a computer during email chess?  It seems like it would have to be illegal, but at the same time impossible to stop.  Does anyone know how (or if) it is regulated during competitive correspondence chess tournaments?

Tough Question to answer phoenixrjp, being very new to chess it hasnt taken me long to figure out what can be done with software analysis running alongside an online chess game. I would imagime it would be possible to run suspected games through some software and compare ratings with game strength......how tedious! Much better to have faith in folks integrity :)

I know from other sites and talking to members that the problem starts to get alot worse from say 1600 and up. I know for a fact that I have been whipped by 1200's and it was quite obvious. As players all we can do is police ourselves and bring our concerns to the "web leader". It's up to us to keep integriety in the game and the site. Noone wants a yahoo site.

The odd time-out may be put down to forgetfulness or personal circumstances that make a chess game unimportant. There is continual debate on other sites about systematic multiple time-outs, where a player starts a large number of games and then loses interest. One site suspends members at the 50 time-out level, though many of us on that site believe the penalty should kick in at 10 or maximum 20 time-outs. I've seen 15 player all-play all tournaments where 10 or 11 show figures of 0/28. That site doesn't kick in with an automatic timeout; the decision to claim is left to the opponent; however, if the opponent fails to claim, he/she is also timed out at one day past double the original move time e.g at 3 days per move, both players would be given 0 points for the game if the person entitled to claim the win hasn't done so by day 7 i.e. 3 days for the original player to move; 3 days for the other player to claim; 1 day grace. I prefer the automatic guillotine on this site, because there's no element of emotional blackmail, where some players feel mean for claiming a few minutes or hours after the deadline. I remember one lady who refused to claim for several days, through kindness. Her opponent consequently was able to continue when he returned to the site. A week or two later the lady went over time herself (same game). Five minutes after she timed out, he claimed without compunction. No good deed goes unpunished.

 

On that site any game timed out in under 5 moves results in no adjustment being made to ratings, though the win counts for the claimant. This reflects the fact that too little has happened to affect ratings, though it would probably be fairer if at least the defaulter lost the relevant number of points they would have dropped for losing if the game had continued.

 

In fact, wouldn't it be sensible to penalise defaulters by double the amount of rating points they would have dropped if they had played on and lost. If they would have lost no points, because of the disparity in the ratings of the 2 players, then have a minimum default penalty of (say) 5 rating points.