when exy first arrived he was a low rated player ... he suddenly jumped 100s of points to be much higher rated than me ... i imediately suspected engine use ... exy then kept playing here for a long time ... i assumed i was wrong in my instinct, because he was not banned ... i hope and trust that the mods are acting on more evidence than simply that rating jump.
Originally posted by whitedeerwithnohornsIn other words...1 googleplex
1= 20
2 = 400
3 = 8,902
4 = 197,281
5 = 4,865,609
6 = 119,060,324
7 = 3,284,294,545
I think the total possible variations in chess was 1 000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (should be 1 followed by 120 zeros 🙂 ) More than all the atoms in the universe...although dont quote me on that.
We have recently had a spate of people whose accounts have been terminated by Russ et al. for various breaches of the Terms of Service of RHP.
This has resulted in some people, many people actually, demanding to know the exact nature of the offences, the reasoning behind the bans, evidence etc.
I would like to draw these persons attention to article 13 of the Terms of Service ( which you all agreed to ). It reads as follows :
13. TERMINATION
You agree that RHP may, under certain circumstances and without prior notice, immediately terminate your RHP account,and access to the Service. Cause for such termination shall include, but not be limited to, (a) breaches or violations of the TOS or other incorporated agreements or guidelines, (b) requests by law enforcement or other government agencies, (c) a request by you (self-initiated account deletions), (d) discontinuance or material modification to the Service (or any part thereof), (e) unexpected technical or security issues or problems, and (f) extended periods of inactivity. Termination of your RHP account includes (a) removal of access to all offerings within the Service, (b) deletion of your password and all related information and content associated with or inside your account (or any part thereof), and (c) barring further use of the Service. Further, you agree that all terminations for cause shall be made in RHP's sole discretion and that RHP shall not be liable to you or any third-party for any termination of your account, any associated email address, or access to the Service.
Originally posted by DustnrogersIn this game of yours against Exy... Game 1344560
0 wins 20 losses and 1 draw, a hard fought one for that matter hahahahaha...oh well, i still dont know if he is an engine thats forsure. But there is only one other player that i have had such a horrible record against and his Iron hand doesnt play here anymore.
He matched up with Fritz on moves 5, 7, 9, 11, 14, 15, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28.
Of these matches:
25, 26, 27 and 28 were part of his mating attack, so I would consider them forced, as it doesn't take a gm to spot the mate in that game. 20 and 21 also seem like there is no real choice.
23 and 24: These are all the better moves by at least a pawn. I'd expect a strong player to pick up on those type of moves.
5, 15, 17: These are between a half a pawn and a pawn better than the next best move. Debatable whether a strong player would pick up on these all the time.
The no matches were: 6 (not in top 7 of Fritz' choices), 8, 10, 11, 13 (not in top 7 of Fritz' choices), 16 (half pawn weaker than optimum move), 19 (A full pawn weaker than Fritz' 1st choice)
So:
Moves analysed: 23
Matches: 16
Match Percentage: 69.5%
Forced Moves: 6
Moves that you'd expect a strong player to spot: 2
That means that up to half of the matched moves are pretty useless in deciding whether he cheated in this game or not. So you're left with 8 matches that could be used as evidence. But, there are also 7 non-matches, 4 of which could be described as outright blunders.
So you tell me. Did he use an engine? This is the sort of data that the mod team had to work with (apart from the utterly useless "get pgn" spy "tool" ). How, pray tell, could anybody be certain enough to ban a player based on that sort of data.
I've mentioned in the PCFC forum that the only way that I can see that they could be sure that he cheated would be if all his endgames matched up perfectly. That would be fair enough, and totally acceptable. My question to the mods is this: How much would you teach a cheater if you came out with a statement saying something like "The user Exy has been banned for using engines in his endgame"? This would quell the ill feeling felt by some who see Exy's ban as a miscarraige of justice due to all the obvious evidence pointing to the fact that he's not an engine user.
D
BTW Dustn, I'm +5 =1 -0 against you. Although I have to say that 4 of those wins were by TO. 🙂
Originally posted by RagnorakOooooooooh, you have the Fritz analysis of ONE of his games, and your implication is that he was not cheating.
In this game of yours against Exy... Game 1344560
He matched up with Fritz on moves 5, 7, 9, 11, 14, 15, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28.
Of these matches:
25, 26, 27 and 28 were part of his mating attack, so I would consider them forced, as it doesn't take a gm to spot the mate in that game. 20 and 21 also seem like there is no ...[text shortened]... TW Dustn, I'm +5 =1 -0 against you. Although I have to say that 4 of those wins were by TO. 🙂
Yet you expect to be proven right over the Mods, who have access to the analysis of ALL his games, PLUS "other evidence".
Sure. Makes perfect sense to me now...
I've got a game against Exy on the go, and I've been a bit suspicious for a while about engine use ...
what do you think ?
Game 1472508
😉
Originally posted by whitedeerwithnohornsThis, of course, is complete rubbish. While there may be x many theoretical moves in a chess game. Only y many are feasible. In certain situations, as little as just one move will be feasible, otherwise you lose. In the opening as white, while you theoretically have 20 possible moves, a number of them are stupid. Even though some mathematician might have calculated there are x many theoretical moves, the facts remains that choosing, say, any one 90% of these theoretical moves will ensure there are not going to be a lot more. Chess is a very finite game and not random maths.
1= 20
2 = 400
3 = 8,902
4 = 197,281
5 = 4,865,609
6 = 119,060,324
7 = 3,284,294,545
I think the total possible variations in chess was 1 000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (should be 1 followed by 120 zeros 🙂 ) More than all the atoms in the universe...although dont quote me on that.
Plus I question this escalation factor in 2. If White plays a2 and Black a5, does that leave 400 possible moves? I think not.
Originally posted by cambridgeianUncontestable proof that you're both using engines.
I've got a game against Exy on the go, and I've been a bit suspicious for a while about engine use ...
what do you think ?
Game 1472508
😉
Originally posted by RagnorakWell, you also have potential evidence in the PM's, game notes and in game messages. Not saying there is evidence there, just that there could be.
In this game of yours against Exy... Game 1344560
He matched up with Fritz on moves 5, 7, 9, 11, 14, 15, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28.
Of these matches:
25, 26, 27 and 28 were part of his mating attack, so I would consider them forced, as it doesn't take a gm to spot the mate in that game. 20 and 21 also seem like there is no ...[text shortened]... TW Dustn, I'm +5 =1 -0 against you. Although I have to say that 4 of those wins were by TO. 🙂
Originally posted by buffalobillThat takes into account the variable of the strength of the player. Possible different positions reached during a game assuming a player can make any move, are nearly infinite. They number more than all the grains of sand on this planet.
This, of course, is complete rubbish. While there may be x many theoretical moves in a chess game. Only y many are feasible. In certain situations, as little as just one move will be feasible, otherwise you lose. In the opening as white, while you theoretically have 20 possible moves, a number of them are stupid. Even though some mathematician might have ...[text shortened]... on factor in 2. If White plays a2 and Black a5, does that leave 400 possible moves? I think not.
D