Cludi Deciding to Leave

Originally posted by Pawn Qween
I thought PM meant Private Message. If this is so, then who is reading PRIVATE messages from one player to another and looking to ban people for them.
What next? Thought Police? 😲

Spreading unsubstantiated rumours by means of PMs after being told to stop would constitute harrassment in my opinion.

Discusiing the possibility of a cheater in PMs rather than spanning the forums is of course perfectly acceptable then if there is evidence present it to the Site Mods and let it take its course.

Its only where PMs are being used to further a cause following a forum ban for airing that cause that I think they are not justified.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Noodles pointed out that that list was of senior players only. She did a search of the Danish Chess Federation and found three Claus Jensen's the highest being rated 1691 http://www.dsu.dk/index.php?id=56&fornavn=Claus&efternavn=Jensen&klub=&min_rating=&max_rating=&kreds=-1

It's impossible to say if any of them are Cludi since there is no ...[text shortened]... ck only to 1995; if Cludi played no OTB tourneys since then, presumably he's not on the list.

Yes there seem to be quite a lot of strong former OTB players here who play now mostly online.

I was chatting about this at my club last week with our 2 strongest players & they basically said they don't play long time control correspondance chess any more because "the internet's full of cheats" to quote an ECF 163 (2100 ELO).

Still, I suppose if you're an agrophobic or bed-ridden former FIDE Master, then I suppose CC is the logical last resort!

Originally posted by Squelchbelch
Yes there seem to be quite a lot of strong former OTB players here who play now mostly online.

I was chatting about this at my club last week with our 2 strongest players & they basically said they don't play long time control correspondance chess any more because "the internet's full of cheats" to quote an ECF 163 (2100 ELO).

Still, I suppose if ...[text shortened]... agrophobic or bed-ridden former FIDE Master, then I suppose CC is the logical last resort!

I can't get our clubs strongest player (ECF200+) = 2250+ to play here (partly) for that very reason. He feels (1) he can play Fritz anytime and (2) its no fun being accused of being Fritz.

Of course there may be other reasons but he has a point that I imagine is shared by many.

The rest of us should stop obsessing about it as it does not generally impact on us too significantly.

Originally posted by Dragon Fire

The rest of us should stop obsessing about it as it does not generally impact on us too significantly.

Yes. Playing here has definately helped my opening play OTB. It's been commented on that I seem to know my stuff in the early stages.
Shame about still losing to simple tactics/combinations & not having an endgame though!

Originally posted by Dragon Fire
I can't get our clubs strongest player (ECF200+) = 2250+ to play here (partly) for that very reason. He feels (1) he can play Fritz anytime and (2) its no fun being accused of being Fritz.

Of course there may be other reasons but he has a point that I imagine is shared by many.

The rest of us should stop obsessing about it as it does not generally impact on us too significantly.

(2) is the more annoying of the two. Playing engines isn't really that annoying, their play is clearly alien. Sometimes they're even fun to play, so I don't consider (1) a big problem. Playing against engines is only aggravating due to the players dishonesty.

Being called fritz is like being slapped 🙁

Originally posted by Adorea
(2) is the more annoying of the two. Playing engines isn't really that annoying, their play is clearly alien. Sometimes they're even fun to play, so I don't consider (1) a big problem. Playing against engines is only aggravating due to the players dishonesty.

Being called fritz is like being slapped 🙁

I think the engine problem is really a concern when you've got someone who can play a bit. Say an OTB 2000 or so, just using Fritz to see if that rook sac really is winning, or using the program to spot (& prevent) mistakes.
An OTB 2000 already knows how to win a won endgame, or declare a draw early in a clearly drawn game. Or indeed when to play the correct strategic move in a closed position.
These 2000 OTB 2200+ CC players are gonna be the nightmare ones to stop.

Originally posted by Squelchbelch
I think the engine problem is really a concern when you've got someone who can play a bit. Say an OTB 2000 or so, just using Fritz to see if that rook sac really is winning, or using the program to spot (& prevent) mistakes.
An OTB 2000 already knows how to win a won endgame, or declare a draw early in a clearly drawn game. Or indeed when to ...[text shortened]... in a closed position.
These 2000 OTB 2200+ CC players are gonna be the nightmare ones to stop.

i'm more worried of a savvy cheater...one who can run two to three engines of analysis simultaneously... I won't give any links or any names, but their is an application which allows you to merge hash-table stimuli (therefore the output's of each engine are considered before continuation). If one were to have this application, and play with an already strong chess knowledge... i don't see any humans beating them.
EDIT/ADD: the three engines which list stimuli, are also affected by user input. So if you see a deeper variation, you may input it to the effect of each engines analysis. This is a considerable problem if Hiarcs Rybka and say Shredder were "banded". However thankfully, nobody does that 🙂. Because, no humans would be beating such a setup anytime soon.

Any humans.
that meens period.
(.)

EDIT: after re-reading my post, i noticed i didn't really specify why thats an issue.

Originally posted by Squelchbelch
I think the engine problem is really a concern when you've got someone who can play a bit. Say an OTB 2000 or so, just using Fritz to see if that rook sac really is winning, or using the program to spot (& prevent) mistakes.
An OTB 2000 already knows how to win a won endgame, or declare a draw early in a clearly drawn game. Or indeed when to ...[text shortened]... in a closed position.
These 2000 OTB 2200+ CC players are gonna be the nightmare ones to stop.

Agreed.

A player rated 2200 OTB who decides to use an engine to check if his complex combinational ideas are sound would be virtually impossible to detect as he would never be making engine moves (remember he is using the engine to check his combinational ideas not to find combinations in the 1st place).

The only pointer to possible engine use in these circumstances would be a lack of tactical mistakes but that in itself would never be conclusive proof of anything.

The only mitigating feature here is why would a player graded 2200 OTB ever want to cheat when there is nothing in it for him. Such a player already takes his chess seriously and is keen on improving. He is capable of analysing combinations and given more time could analyse them himself more accurately and probably obtain a perfectly legitimate correspondence grade of 2400.

It is pointless to do this. I believe the problem is really with weaker players who don't really want to learn and who don't take chess seriously. This is an alternate life for them. Somewhere where they can create an impression and be more important than they are in the real world. Such players will always eventually make the elementary mistake that proves beyond reasonable doubt what they are doing.

Of course we were talking about Cludi here and the question arises on whether he was one of those people and frankly that is not proven and a witch hunt has driven away a valuble member of the community. If there is conclusive evidence then Cludi should be banned but despite DT now being a game mod that has not yet happened so the assumption mus be one of innocence.

Originally posted by Dragon Fire
Agreed.

A player rated 2200 OTB who decides to use an engine to check if his complex combinational ideas are sound would be virtually impossible to detect as he would never be making engine moves (remember he is using the engine to check his combinational ideas not to find combinations in the 1st place).

The only pointer to possible engine use in t ...[text shortened]... e DT now being a game mod that has not yet happened so the assumption mus be one of innocence.

The new Game Mod team has only being up for a few days; that they haven't banned anybody yet is hardly evidence of someone's innocence. Use the word "witch hunt" over and over again if you please, but you might also want to look at Cludi's own analyses in his blog which show his match-ups with Fritz being consistently 20% higher than the other players in the finals of the 2007 Championship. Someone is not entitled to a presumption of innocence if the evidence indicates guilt.

Originally posted by no1marauder
The new Game Mod team has only being up for a few days; that they haven't banned anybody yet is hardly evidence of someone's innocence. Use the word "witch hunt" over and over again if you please, but you might also want to look at Cludi's own analyses in his blog which show his match-ups with Fritz being consistently 20% higher than the other players in ...[text shortened]... hip. Someone is not entitled to a presumption of innocence if the evidence indicates guilt.

I agree that if site admins haven't banned anybody yet is not evidence of someone's innocence.

BUT

Person is entitled to a presumption of innocence if the evidence is not enough for making entitled persons to find him guilty. And you are not entitled to find guilty someone. So its not for you to decide if someone is guilty or not.

Originally posted by no1marauder
The new Game Mod team has only being up for a few days; that they haven't banned anybody yet is hardly evidence of someone's innocence. Use the word "witch hunt" over and over again if you please, but you might also want to look at Cludi's own analyses in his blog which show his match-ups with Fritz being consistently 20% higher than the other players in ...[text shortened]... hip. Someone is not entitled to a presumption of innocence if the evidence indicates guilt.

I don't see where cludi consistently has a 20% higher match-up than his opponents (at least as he presented the data). He has a higher match-up in 6/14 games; the biggest difference is less than 16% (David Tebb - cludi 1/2 - 1/2; analysis III).

Originally posted by Korch
I agree that if site admins haven't banned anybody yet is not evidence of someone's innocence.

BUT

Person is entitled to a presumption of innocence if the evidence is not enough for making entitled persons to find him guilty. And you are not entitled to find guilty someone. So its not for you to decide if someone is guilty or not.

I am entitled to have my opinion based on the evidence in front of me, as is everybody else.

Originally posted by gambit05
I don't see where cludi consistently has a 20% higher match-up than his opponents (at least as he presented the data). He has a higher match-up in 6/14 games; the biggest difference is less than 16% (David Tebb - cludi 1/2 - 1/2; analysis III).

I'm not talking about the third choices (which prove little). Concentrate on 1st choice matchups and close seconds. An 85% matchup in almost 450 non-opening book moves is IM31 territory.

Originally posted by no1marauder
I am entitled to have my opinion based on the evidence in front of me, as is everybody else.

In each more or less law-based state you can be sued for stating your opinion about someone`s guilt in public, until entitled person/institution haven`t found that person guilty.

Originally posted by Korch
In each more or less law-based state you can be sued for stating your opinion about someone`s guilt in public, until entitled person/institution haven`t found that person guilty.

Well he can file a lawsuit if he desires. Why you think it is OK for people to come on and say he's innocent but wrong for people to say, based on the evidence, he appears guilty is a mystery to me.