Originally posted by scandiumI think you misunderstood him because he didn't admit anything - quite the contrary. He claimed they mistook his sharp Traxler preparation for engine use.
We know this is false. He's admitted to consulting the engine analysis, and apparently quite deeply, during the game itself.
Your second point, and don't take it personally because I usually respect what you contribute here, is pure fallacy. Opening books are not pages of engine output, nor are they made up of machine vs machine or man vs machine games. ...[text shortened]... rohibts the later; therefore it must, by extension, prohibit the former as well.
"I had a lot of engine analysis on [the Traxler] and yes, I used it in game.."
This doesn't mean he was actively using a chess engine in a game. If we are to believe him, it means that he collected analysis based on engine recommendations (prior to the game) and then used this research in-game. His next quote makes it all clear:
"It's just so wierd.. pregame analysis was explicitly allowed! "
He's claiming that all his analysis was before the game. This would be allowed regardless of whether he used all the engines and all the databases in the world to create it. The problem is if he plugged his game into some chess engine after it left his pre-game preparation. Right now, I'm pretty sure that he did. It's unlikely that his opponents even allowed him to use his "deep" analysis because they certainly didn't put that much work into a fairly obscure opening like the Traxler (and what % of his games is that anyway?). Even GMs probably know very little theory on it. Moreover, after the opening, the Gods have placed the middlegame and endgame as GM Joel Benjamin once put it.
What is the feelings about his presence in clans? ih8sens was a member of three clans, of wich one he was in the league. What does the clanleader think about this?
What about his fellow members in his clan?
I think there is a spill-over in shame, from the cheater to the clan and its leader and members. The cheater is gone, but the members are still there.
Is there any responsabilities a clan leader should think of?
Hi all,
even before seeing ih8sens'reply about our games I wanted to mention both of them as a reason for thinking that he does not cheat (as he said, in the game where I am black I have an easy game, probably = or even =+, and in the game where I am white he did a sack that I think is not sound-I must check this now with an engine- and I think I am winning there)...
also for his age(teenage), some very fast improvements are possible and very usually...you do not progress constantly...you play at some level...after that increasing a lot suddenly, after that decreasing a little, after that increasing again, etc...this happens somehow fast until you reach some peak where the improvement becomes much more difficult...
I saw in OTB players(about 35-40 years old) that 2 years ago were playing poor games(like 1500-1600 games here in my opinion) and that now are very tough opposition for FMs...
I also think he is a bit overrated now(he won most of his games against 1600s and he did not face enough 1800-2000 players yet)...
Of course, not cheating in some games do not prove you are not a cheater...but I doubt a cheater would play correctly in some of his games...
There is more involved than seeing that a person put a game into a program with a chess engine. The mods spend a lot of time on statistical analysis and one of the things I would think that they do is look at some of the player's games and determine their level of play.
For example, you need to look at some samples of how the person played before his sudden sharp increase in rating and then compare that with his concepts at his peak. If you look at Black's play in Game Game 4220803 and see that the player played the move 23...Qf6+? can you imagine this same player beating experts in only 2 months?
Sure, we all make blunders, that's why the mods take several samples for comparison. But the moves from his previous games clearly show a concept of a 1500 rated player. Then look at his ability to make astonishing master level moves after only 2 months. Very unlikely.
Arrakis
Why am I not surprised to read this?
His standard of play from that only a few months ago and the rate of improvement was totally impossible. Only 6 months ago he was getting tactics totally wrong against me in Game 3872011 but before long he is beating players where I could only dream.
As I have said before, improvement is a long hard slog with many set backs along the way. What ih8sens was doing was instant and is simply not possible with any number of books and personal coaching.
Originally posted by Dragon FireI think improvement like that is possible...but only for somebody who is a natural and is just starting out playing the game...not somebody who was 1500 for...how long was that?
Why am I not surprised to read this?
His standard of play from that only a few months ago and the rate of improvement was totally impossible. Only 6 months ago he was getting tactics totally wrong against me in Game 3872011 but before long he is beating players where I could only dream.
As I have said before, improvement is a long hard slog w ...[text shortened]... was doing was instant and is simply not possible with any number of books and personal coaching.
Originally posted by Dragon FireOriginally posted by Dragon Fire
Just post us a link it will be so much easier.
Copy and paste it from your browser.
Sudden unexplained rises in rating can certainly be an indication of inappropriate behaviour ...
Note to self.. quit practicing
No sorry I kinda misquoted you.. you're right.
Originally posted by scandiumFor once I agree with virtually everything you have said here.
That it took him 9 months to go from 1300 to 1500, and then only 3 months to go from 1500 to almost 2000, yes that is very suspicious. When the most he contributes, at that level of supposed chess understanding, is to 'sac your pieces and attack', well that also raises some eyebrows.
And when he gets into long discussions of a particular theoretical lin ...[text shortened]... and your ilk cannot be cleansed from this site soon enough for my liking.
There is, however, a difference between what ih8sens may have been doing and legitimate research but I totally agree with you that one needs to be careful that legitimate research does not cross the line or we could all, even GMs, embark on that slippery downward slop.
I suppose its like the smoker who just has 1 last cigarette or the alcoholic who just has 1 drink. We all know it doesn't work that way.
Originally posted by tomtom232I should certainly remember that 1, shouldn't I?
Originally posted by Dragon Fire
Sudden unexplained rises in rating can certainly be an indication of inappropriate behaviour ...
Note to self.. quit practicing
No sorry I kinda misquoted you.. you're right.
It did set me thinking! As you say a virtual admittance of what most of us were thinking but could not say.
Originally posted by scandiumI even agreed with you here until I got to the last paragraph. Research of past games is designed to find flaws and help improve next time. The reality is if done properly it is actually used extremely rarely therefore having little if any impact on an engine match up percentage.
We know this is false. He's admitted to consulting the engine analysis, and apparently quite deeply, during the game itself.
Your second point, and don't take it personally because I usually respect what you contribute here, is pure fallacy. Opening books are not pages of engine output, nor are they made up of machine vs machine or man vs machine games. ...[text shortened]... rohibts the later; therefore it must, by extension, prohibit the former as well.
Originally posted by coquettetut tut, little lady ..... 'It's a boring game and not worth playing through' ... looks like a win for white to me 😏
I had one loss and one draw with him. I've posted his closing message to me on the final move of the draw. It's a boring game and not worth playing through, but I've included it to show it. That's all.
The point is, based on his own statement, that he had a 100% record in clan match games up to this draw. This really points out the problem with engine us ...[text shortened]... . I haven't lost or drawn a clan game yet, until now.
Good Game
Game 3610270
See me after class for extra lessons 🙂