29 Jun 08
1 edit
Originally posted by RizhaninThis worries me too. If one chooses to be dishonest and immoral, there will be ways. For example, couldn't a player simply alternate between five very different engines or play several third or tenth move choices when the difference is not huge? The matchup rates would be inconsistent, but the result will not be different since the critical moves would be accurate. Moreover, one wouldn't need to be strong to know the critical moves, because it would be clear from the evaluation spikes.
I'm pessimistic about all those cheat discover methods. Yes, if the cheater is a complete fool and just lets his engine play instead of him then the fact of cheating can be proved. But if he just uses the program from time to time, let's say once or twice per game, can he be discovered and punished in this case? The obvious answer is NO. I think web chess j ...[text shortened]... 't be taken too seriously. You will never be 100% guaranteed you're not playing a cheater 🙁
With this said, I agree with DragonFire and !~TONY~! that most players are not cheating and are unlikely to come across one. However, the cheating itself is not the main problem, it's the poisoning of the atmosphere and uncertainty. What was once an unquestionable duel of mind and will is marred by cheating accusations. Even if proven false, hard-earned accomplishments may be tainted (mainly among the top). Thus, there is less respect for the top players' abilities and less of a desire to be among them. This will manifest itself in less enthusiasm and fewer players - not healthy. Moreover, it devalues everyone's work and skill because it hurts the image of online chess in general. It trivializes a truly beautiful and complex game (or maybe tool is equally appropriate). Just consider how much you would value graduates from an online university if you knew that dishonest individuals had the option of simply printing the degree themselves and that it was next to impossible to determine whether they did or didn't? I know I wouldn't put much value on that degree. Even if 90% of graduates were genuine, I would need to rigorously test them to be convinced.
Luckily, while online chess is not worth much in terms of chess prestige, it is still enjoyable and contributes to chess strength. Serious players will be able to demonstrate their skill OTB where it matters and where cheating is not a problem due to the face to face nature. To continue the online university analogy, it would be like transferring to MIT and getting a 3.75 GPA. While the online university degree wasn't worth anything, the skills and knowledge it conferred allowed one to excel in a very competitive and relevant environment (also casting aside prior suspicions). Thus, I would say chess as a whole is healthy and vibrant, but internet chess has problems to solve.
Unfortunately, eradicating cheating through better security and detection seems farfetched. However, the temptation to cheat can be greatly decreased. Since people cheat mainly to feed their egos and make themselves feel smarter than they are, this points to a reform or even abolishment of the rating system. Given that the rating system is also a motivator and a progress indicator for honest players, any change needs to be thoroughly considered. Similarly, if OTB chess is emphasized as being the only true representation of strength, perhaps online players will not feel defined by their rating and won't have any inclination to inflate them.
BTW: This thread wasn't meant to be about cheating. It should probably be split.
29 Jun 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Vanquishthat's why i said 9 x 9 with an extra knight, plus fischer random. Seems to me this would weed out a lot of the losers.
a cheat can reset a board to play random fischer chess and there are various custom programs out there atleast 8x8 that can still use software to cheat with using extra pieces ect.No,the answer is something very few players if any on this site(except me!)know how to catch a cheat for real!ICC has the answer.They employ a special overlay sophisticated chess er of paying members and the membership is quite expensive,so ICC can afford such luxuries.
01 Jul 08
Originally posted by NorrisByou get a profile picture, it could be a picture of you or a chess related picture. Plus you can have as many challenges at one time, (if you dont suscribe you can only have 6 at a time)
I dont see why I should. I can get every feature here and more at chesshere.com, I dont think Id wanna play more than 6 games anyway, I have no desire to play in a siege or in a tournament forced to play some engine user for a worthless title. Or join some clan that wants me to play 50 games to bring it up to the top of the worthless clan standings.
...[text shortened]... ve games. The way I see it subs play far too many games and they're atleast 100 pts overrated.
oh yeah and no more annoying ads
Of course these are only a few of the good reasons.
Martin
(1200)
02 Jul 08
Originally posted by exigentskyPrecisely.
This worries me too. If one chooses to be dishonest and immoral, there will be ways. For example, couldn't a player simply alternate between five very different engines or play several third or tenth move choices when the difference is not huge? The matchup rates would be inconsistent, but the result will not be
02 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by exigentskyand the password is:
The matchup rates would be inconsistent, but the result will not be different since the critical moves would be accurate...
I agree with XXX and YYY that most players are not cheating and are unlikely to come across one.
yahoo chess
03 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by exigentskyWhilst this is true and is, indirectly, a perfectly valid criticism of any "engine match up" statistics to indicate engine use (i.e. if you compare 10 engines and record each engines 1st choice after 15 secs, 30 seconds, 1 minute and 5 minutes you may end up with 6 or more 1st choice moves, unless the move is "obviously best" when you can hardly blame a human for choosing it). This means that not to get some sort of match up virtually means making a serious blunder which if you are strong and take your time over each move is theoretically possible to avoid. As engines get better this gets potentially even harder as engine play becomes ever more perfect (on long term strategy) and better than even the strongest humans.
This worries me too. If one chooses to be dishonest and immoral, there will be ways. For example, couldn't a player simply alternate between five very different engines or play several third or tenth move choices when the difference is not huge? The matchup rates would be inconsistent, but the result will not be different since the critical moves would be to be strong to know the critical moves, because it would be clear from the evaluation spikes.
There is no easy solution to this. Identifying a user jumping from one engine to another may give the impression of none human play because of inconsistent confusing plans (or no obvious plan as the engines shift from one strategic idea to another) so you have to focus on more subtle and obvious indicators of engine use and these are not easy to find but once found can give virtually 100% confidence.
The some are examples of what constitutes obvious abuse (in my opinion) although this is not an exhaustive list.
(1) playing a complex and dangerous line (that must be played precisely accurately or defeat is possible) that wins in 8 rather than the obvious and simple win in 12;
(2) making what appears to be a mindless piece sacrifice that moves the engine into a won tablebase position (in 30 moves) whilst keeping all pieces on the board would eventually result in a win in , say, 20;
(3) not recognising a drawn book ending (for example exchanging down to K & 2N vs K rather than keep Ps on the board) and avoiding it as the winning side for a short term material gain.
These are just some examples where engine use can be positively identified but finding such conclusive evidence is undoubtedly a difficult task.
Unfortunately there are no quick fixes and the mods have (or had) a difficult task which I feel most people here are underestimating. Undoubtedly there are now a few pretty obvious cheaters climbing up the rankings and I could name at least 10 absolute certainties (in my opinion) who are now above 2000 and rising and these do need to go asap. However, I also feel many "average" players are overstating the problem as the site is not infested with cheaters ouside of the top 100 players (except those rising who haven't been noticed yet) and the problem can be far worse on some other sites that do nothing and permit no discussion.
So don't let this put you off subscribing as you will get a lot out of the site regardless.
03 Jul 08
3 edits
Originally posted by RizhaninGood Players have strong intuition they can feel their opponents presence on the board engines have a unique presence that is very different from humans there's no mistaking the difference and it doesn't take long to figure out if he's in there or not.
You will never be 100% guaranteed you're not playing a cheater 🙁
In a Chess game I can almost reach out and touch my opponents mind with my hand there is nowhere to hide it's just me and him or her you are that close to another person in a game.
03 Jul 08
Originally posted by AristolleSurly thou jesteth!
Good Players have strong intuition they can feel their opponents presence on the board engines have a unique presence that is very different from humans there's no mistaking the difference and it doesn't take long to figure out if he's in there or not.
In a Chess game I can almost reach out and touch my opponents mind with my hand there is nowhere to hide it's just me and him or her you are that close to another person in a game.
- Joined
- 09 Aug 01
- Moves
- 54191
03 Jul 08
Originally posted by davidgraysonhe isn't jesting.
Surly thou jesteth!
as a game evolves, one trying to impose one's plan while thwarting his foe's plan. the game is a struggle between the plans of both sides. to play well, one has to understand the plans and motives of his foe as the game evolves.
now a computer isl not burdened by the struggle of the past moves, and can spot (calculate) seemingly out of the box ideas. now that's a sign of a machine.
03 Jul 08
Originally posted by AristolleI used to think this was true, but I have played several players on this site who later turned out to be engine users and in most cases I didn't suspect a thing.
Good Players have strong intuition they can feel their opponents presence on the board engines have a unique presence that is very different from humans there's no mistaking the difference and it doesn't take long to figure out if he's in there or not.
In a Chess game I can almost reach out and touch my opponents mind with my hand there is nowhere to hide it's just me and him or her you are that close to another person in a game.
03 Jul 08
Originally posted by Dragon Firethat is pure conjecture, i don't see how you can make these silly and unfortunate statements and keep a straight face. Your rising 2000 crew started out as 1200's just like the rest. 😛
However, I also feel many "average" players are overstating the problem as the site is not infested with cheaters ouside of the top 100 players (except those rising who haven't been noticed yet) and the problem can be far worse on some other sites that do nothing and permit no discussion.
Originally posted by eldragonflyClearly you have an agenda and a definition of "cheating" that is different to most people here. Also you obviously cannot be bothered to read my previous postings.
that is pure conjecture, i don't see how you can make these silly and unfortunate statements and keep a straight face. Your rising 2000 crew started out as 1200's just like the rest. 😛
What I have repeatedly said is that these players of average strength are simply unlikely to be cheating (unlikely is not, incidently, the same as not) with the exception being players who are rising through this level on their way up and are probably unbeaten at the current time and who cannot be eliminated from the equation.
If you want to weed out the cheaters you need a sensible basis to isolate and investigate them and, in my opinion, this does not involve the investigation of countless 1600 players. On your proposals everyone should be investigated which in reality means that nothing would ever be decided.
It makes perfect sense to focus on the most likely candidates. Call my statements conjecture, silly and unfortunate if you like but they are certainly a more practical way forward than anything I have had the misfortune to hear from you.
You obviously feel you are coming up against loads of cheaters rated 1400 which presumably is why you are not progressing beyond this level yourself and I would suggest your best route to improvement is to acquire a few good books and read them rather than assume every 1500 player who beats you is cheating.
In the real world where people play OTB a 1500 player does not even make our clubs C team. These are the people who come to the club week after week, play casual chess against each other and roll over in 20 moves against our league players as a matter of course. Some are great guys who play interesting chess but they rarely beat the 1700-1800 league players let alone those above that level.