07 Feb 07
Originally posted by cmsMasterAkizy and Weyerstrass seem legit as well. I dunno anything about either of them, but Weyerstrass was on that list of the top Chess players of all-time that (was it Fat Lady?) posted. He was like 1000+ or something, but he was on there.
There are some, i.e. David Tebb and NorthernLad.
Akizy says he is a retired tourney player, and that is something it seems it would be easy to be caught at if he were lying.
but it is insane how many cheaters there are. Ironman was before my time, so I think Jimster is the highest rated player I have ever seen get banned.
TouragNew's engine was apparently better than Jimster's since he took, I think a couple, games off him.
Do you think some of the higher lvl engine users lose on purpose or throw away moves now and again just to say "if I was using an engine would I make this blunder"?
Always seems to be a few suspicious losses on their graphs somewhere. Must be games where they tried making some of their own moves eh?
07 Feb 07
Originally posted by Turanthorthere's no telling how many of them just keep coming back. in fact, I see no reason to assume they didn't come back. it seems to it's even likely they just think: "game over for ironman31, oh well, I'll just create a new personality, say, 'jimster', and start again."
but it is insane how many cheaters there are.
also, most 'old names' seem to have already dropped off (ironman31, maryann, gauravv etc), and now the discovered engine users usually are unfamiliar.
that said, I have a habit of doing a cursory check before clan challenging or accepting one, to avoid pitting hellfire clan members against the most blatant engine users, and jimster was just too suspicious.
07 Feb 07
Originally posted by wormwoodJimster has been around since january 2004, he has lost 48 games. Why was his cheating obvious (to you) as clearly he was around for ages before anyone picked it up.
there's no telling how many of them just keep coming back. in fact, I see no reason to assume they didn't come back. it seems to it's even likely they just think: "game over for ironman31, oh well, I'll just create a new personality, say, 'jimster', and start again."
also, most 'old names' seem to have already dropped off (ironman31, maryann, gauravv etc ...[text shortened]... an members against the most blatant engine users, and jimster was just too suspicious.
07 Feb 07
Originally posted by Wulebgryou are of course ignoring the fact that, quite often, Kasparov would play a better move than Fritz.
Careful. It almost sounds like you're saying that Kasparov could not find good moves 90-95% of the time. In a sense, I suppose you're correct. 99% is more like it.
Matching Fritz is another matter.
07 Feb 07
Originally posted by KeplerComputers make mistakes.
But how would we mere mortals know it was better?
Hydra, is supposedly one of the strongest chess engines playing at the moment --- it kicked Adams (2600-2700?) arse badly.
yet, it lost both of its encounters with Corr. GM Arno Nickel.
and most obvoiusally, if the computer lost, it means it made mistakes.
07 Feb 07
Originally posted by ShinidokiI don't see that the computer making mistakes guarantees that Kasparaov (or any other K) would definitely make a better move. If that were so Kramnik would not have lost to a computer. Humans make mistakes just as easily.
Computers make mistakes.
Hydra, is supposedly one of the strongest chess engines playing at the moment --- it kicked Adams (2600-2700?) arse badly.
yet, it lost both of its encounters with Corr. GM Arno Nickel.
and most obvoiusally, if the computer lost, it means it made mistakes.
08 Feb 07
Originally posted by Dragon FireI feel the same way DF. Seems like whomever gets banned for cheating there is a contingent of ppl who post "saw that one coming" or something to that effect.
Jimster has been around since january 2004, he has lost 48 games. Why was his cheating obvious (to you) as clearly he was around for ages before anyone picked it up.
I never play any of these ppl and a certain lvl of Chess play is beyond me so I dont have a real inkling for who is cheating unless they are very obvious like a Touragnew or MaryAnn.
08 Feb 07
1 edit
Originally posted by sonhouseand what about the overall winning percentage * ???
[b]That's right, a novice CAN find good moves but not at a 90-95% rate.
Akizy 92,18%
seadevil 95,79%
Weyerstrass 93,60%
wilfried 97,89%
kingcaptured 82,21%
jimster 85,57%
Northern Lad 86,07%
EveRyDay 97,44 %
hww 85,65%
Peter9 96,90%
ilywrin 89,42%
David Tebb 87,66%
UltimateWIN 92,02%
perkovic 89,29%
Tequila 84,29%
*: (wins+draws/2) / total games
08 Feb 07
Originally posted by Dragon Firewell, to me he looked suspicious enough, so that I selected other players for the challenge. not enough so that I would've filed a complaint, but well, I think it would've been slightly irresponsible from me to select him once I got suspicious.
Jimster has been around since january 2004, he has lost 48 games. Why was his cheating obvious (to you) as clearly he was around for ages before anyone picked it up.
so I picked gauravv instead... 😞
08 Feb 07
Originally posted by Turanthorwhy is that surprising? we are required to shut up about our suspicions until the players in question have been banned.
I feel the same way DF. Seems like whomever gets banned for cheating there is a contingent of ppl who post "saw that one coming" or something to that effect.