Originally posted by KorchWrong. Let me quote you in this thread korch, as usual your insincere and redundant remarks lead nowhere.
As usually your logic has failed.
"Your claims without reference to facts (in this case - forum posts) has zero value. If you cant base your claims on facts then you are liar."
Originally posted by eldragonflyThanks for quiting my text as i will not need to repeat it. (Good boy! 😀) Your claim "Wrong" is another your claim with non sequitur arguments (quoting text which does not base your point) and without facts.
Wrong. Let me quote you in this thread korch, as usual your insincere and redundant remarks lead nowhere.
"Your claims without reference to facts (in this case - forum posts) has zero value. If you cant base your claims on facts then you are liar."
P.S, Probably that thread should be renamed to "Tell me why I should take serious eldragonfly" 😀
Originally posted by eldragonflyAnother baseless claim without any logic, attributing opponent with opinion he have never stated.
This is exactly what is nothing but conjecture, this is the very point you casually toss into the discussion, always without any proof, without any verification, this idea of natural consequence of engine use must always lead to a high rating.
What is an idiotic assumption is your "foolproof" promotion of the hopelessly flawed idea that there aren't any below 2000 or is it 1500 that are using engines.
Originally posted by eldragonflyI can produce you lots of evidence of engine uses rated above 2000 who have been banned.
This is exactly what is nothing but conjecture, this is the very point you casually toss into the discussion, always without any proof, without any verification, this idea of natural consequence of engine use must always lead to a high rating.
What is an idiotic assumption is your "foolproof" promotion of the hopelessly flawed idea that there aren't any below 2000 or is it 1500 that are using engines.
Perhaps you would be kind enough to post in this thread those rated 1500 who have been banned. Of course if your insinuation is merely a baseless allegation and there are not any players at this level that have actually been banned for engine use perhaps you would be kind enough to PM me, Korch and others with whom you disagree on his point the evidence. While you are at it please report your evidence to the new "mods" so they can take action.
Your baseless claims are made without any evidence and on the assumption of false logic. At no stage in this debate have you attempted to produce proof of your claims whilst your opponents have done so repeatedly so please produce some now.
and whilst you are at it please stop misquoting everyone as no one has said it is only players above a certain grade that cheat merely that cheats will eventually rise to these levels and that it is best to focus there in eliminating the problem, but of course if evidence comes up at lower levels action must and presumably will also be taken.
Originally posted by Dragon FireThis player was banned for using an engine when his top rating was only 1194: http://www.timeforchess.com/profile/playerprofile.php?uid=87962
I can produce you lots of evidence of engine uses rated above 2000 who have been banned.
Perhaps you would be kind enough to post in this thread those rated 1500 who have been banned. Of course if your insinuation is merely a baseless allegation and there are not any players at this level that have actually been banned for engine use perhaps you would ...[text shortened]... of course if evidence comes up at lower levels action must and presumably will also be taken.
It would be easier to find others if the Site Admins hadn't deleted the Removed List.
Originally posted by no1marauderI don't believe him to have been banned for using an engine but rather to have been banned for manipulating ratings by other foul means.
This player was banned for using an engine when his top rating was only 1194: http://www.timeforchess.com/profile/playerprofile.php?uid=87962
It would be easier to find others if the Site Admins hadn't deleted the Removed List.
Originally posted by Dragon FireYou are absolutely wrong. http://www.timeforchess.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=19702&page=4
I don't believe him to have been banned for using an engine but rather to have been banned for manipulating ratings by other foul means.
He claimed his Dad helped him in various games, but that "excuse" was not believed by the Game Mods. Esp. since his match ups with a certain engine were about 100%.
Originally posted by no1marauderThis claim from blobbys post is adequate for a ban
You are absolutely wrong. http://www.timeforchess.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=19702&page=4
He claimed his Dad helped him in various games, but that "excuse" was not believed by the Game Mods. Esp. since his match ups with a certain engine were about 100%.
"my Dad played about 16 of my games when i was 762 or whatever, and yes i did want to recover quickly, and sometimes my dad tells me the best moves to play in some of my games but he dosen't play many, so yes that is why i beat lubrio, and i'll admit he is also helping me against talem16, ThePO and two games against arrdvarkhome as i don't want to lose them straight away. So is this cheating Ravello? oh and while were on this subject does anyone know a good engine to buy or site where it can help me learn the tactics quick? ".
I doubt if at his level he used an engine in any significant way and if he had just started using it to prove some pathetic point it got him instantly banned. The point is once he started using an engine his rating would not remain at 1100 and it would start to rise. That in itself should warrant attention in line with previous postings I have made on this subject.
I am not saying and never have said that someone rated 1500 is not using an engine (after all eveyone, even engine users start at 1200) but that someone who is statically at 1500 is probably not using an engine and if he is it is having a negligible impact on his results as it is either:
(1) a very poor engine (the chess engine with Windows Vista comes to mind);
(2) he is using it very badly; or
(3) he is using it for the odd move that is not affecting the result of the game.
If we start on witch hunts looking for sub 1200 engine users we have no chance of dealing with the real problems.
Originally posted by Dragon FireYou can doubt all you want, but the evidence was that Blobby started using an engine (ChessMaster) in virtually every game at a certain point. And he was not caught by the Game Mods, but by alert other players here (in this case, Ravello) who posted about it in the Forums. These days, such posts would be removed to prevent "witch hunts" and Blobby would be allowed to cheat for many months (if not endlessly) to the detriment of all his opponents, the vast majority being rated far lower than 2000. This example (and there are others; JamesWoodley and Tlai1992 come instantly to mind), refutes your and !~TONY~!'s bland assertion that cheaters don't effect the average player here.
This claim from blobbys post is adequate for a ban
[i/]"my Dad played about 16 of my games when i was 762 or whatever, and yes i did want to recover quickly, and sometimes my dad tells me the best moves to play in some of my games but he dosen't play many, so yes that is why i beat lubrio, and i'll admit he is also helping me against talem16, ThePO and unts looking for sub 1200 engine users we have no chance of dealing with the real problems.
I don't agree with the implication that cheaters should be able to cheat as long as their rating doesn't get tooooooooo high. If a 1000 or 1100 suddenly starts winning all their games against competition he previously could barely hold his own against, I see no reason to exclude him from scrutiny. If they are found to be cheats, players here will be spared from facing engines in many games.
Originally posted by no1marauderActually if his dad had helped him in his games it`s violation of 3(b). So that post was enough to ban him.
You are absolutely wrong. http://www.timeforchess.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=19702&page=4
He claimed his Dad helped him in various games, but that "excuse" was not believed by the Game Mods. Esp. since his match ups with a certain engine were about 100%.
Originally posted by KorchNo s**t, Sherlock. However, investigation revealed the unsurprising fact that his "Dad" made moves that matched up to ChessMaster about 100%. Juvenile cheaters upon being caught sometimes used the "someone else helped with a few moves" excuse; tlai1992 had an "older brother".
Actually if his dad had helped him in his games it`s violation of 3(b). So that post was enough to ban him.
Originally posted by no1marauderIf I came on a little strong with the "Cheats don't affect lower rated players" idea, I apologize. I don't mean to imply that they don't affect lower rated players. My point is very simple - If someone uses an engine to assist their play, it's very likely that they'll rise in rating, probably to the 2100+ range, where they'll no longer affect lower rated players. Of course, this is not to say they don't screw the lower rated players on the way up. All I'm saying is the majority of the damage done by uncaught cheaters will be to higher rated players. I doubt you can disput this fact. That said, I've thought my stance over a little bit, and came to the conclusion that if the new game mods and the system performs well, it's likely that the cheaters will damage lower rated players equally or more than they will damage high rated players. If players with suspicious rating graphs were somehow reported autonomously to the game mods (I feel like this shouldn't be too difficult), it's likely that they would be picked off quite quickly if they were in fact cheating, so most would take some games off lower rated players, and right when they hit the big time, they'd be banned. With the current system, it's likely they'd do more damage at the top. The 5 mods in place could never handle the casebook that we had in nearly enough time to catch them quickly enough, given the processes we went through to decide on a case. Either way, it's unfortunate that it's impossible to catch cheaters before they do damage.
You can doubt all you want, but the evidence was that Blobby started using an engine (ChessMaster) in virtually every game at a certain point. And he was not caught by the Game Mods, but by alert other players here (in this case, Ravello) who posted about it in the Forums. These days, such posts would be removed to prevent "witch hunts" and Blobby would ...[text shortened]... hey are found to be cheats, players here will be spared from facing engines in many games.
Originally posted by no1marauderI don't agree with the implication that cheaters should be able to cheat as long as their rating doesn't get tooooooooo high.
You can doubt all you want, but the evidence was that Blobby started using an engine (ChessMaster) in virtually every game at a certain point. And he was not caught by the Game Mods, but by alert other players here (in this case, Ravello) who posted about it in the Forums. These days, such posts would be removed to prevent "witch hunts" and Blobby would hey are found to be cheats, players here will be spared from facing engines in many games.
"Straw man" again - nobody has stated that "cheaters should be able to cheat as long as their rating doesn't get tooooooooo high.".
Originally posted by KorchI realize that English isn't your first language, but an implication doesn't require an explicit statement to the same effect.
[b]I don't agree with the implication that cheaters should be able to cheat as long as their rating doesn't get tooooooooo high.
"Straw man" again - nobody has stated that "cheaters should be able to cheat as long as their rating doesn't get tooooooooo high.".[/b]