Cheating in chess

[David Fowler]

I'm very sorry to say. It doesn't help that some competitions seem determined to deviate from the simple expedient of following FIDE, thereby further complicating matters.

FIDE have a history of periodic stupidity in their rule making. Anyone for defaulting players who are 10 seconds late?

Point taken, but I'm not convinced that having numerous variations of a law / rule and therefore the absence of consistency that would follow is helpful.

[NickFaulks]

With respect it is that easy

It must be wonderful to be so perfect.

As to your own example, I'm really not sure what it is meant to prove.

Try reading it again. Can you tell me what is the point of having a team of well remunerated specialist anti-cheating arbiters travelling around with their electronic gizmos if a player can walk straight through the lot while having ( knowingly or not ) a phone in their pocket?

[LawrenceCooper]

It doesn't help that some competitions seem determined to deviate from the simple expedient of following FIDE, thereby further complicating matters.

I've found myself having to return to my room because I've forgotten to take my watch off and sometimes had a pen in my possession. Having got used to having both on my person in the previous 35+ years of playing chess it did take a bit of getting used to in events that had this stipulation. I really don't see an issue with domestic events that have no wish to enforce such rules.

[David Fowler]

With respect it is that easy

It must be wonderful to be so perfect.

I guess your need to resort to sarcasm says a lot. If you really think that being able to remember to follow one simple to understand rule makes a person perfect then I really do despair.

As to your own example, I'm really not sure what it is meant to prove.

Try reading it again. Can you tell me what is the point of having a team of well remunerated specialist anti-cheating arbiters travelling around with their electronic gizmos if a player can walk straight through the lot while having ( knowingly or not ) a phone in their pocket?

Ah, your example was simply meant to convey the incompetence of the systems in place at this event rather than anything else. I'm sure you're correct.

[Ian Paternoster]

I have given up playing chess on online sites, there is so much cheating. Although the sites say they have algorithms that recognise cheating. They are not interested as long as they take your money.

[NickFaulks]

I have given up playing chess on online sites, there is so much cheating.

Ian, I have no idea of how strong a player you are, you do not appear to have a FIDE title. I have no doubt that people routinely cheat online in order to beat GMs, but why do you believe they cheat in order to beat you?

[Kevin Thurlow]

I'm only a CM and primarily play in non-serious events, but have had about a dozen games awarded to me after I lost as the opponents were identified as cheats. So it does happen.

Admittedly, in a couple of the games I was so bad they didn't need to cheat!

[Richard Bates]

Personally I have no idea how or why people conclude that vast numbers of opponents are cheating against them when playing online or, frankly, why they let it them bother them so much. Except perhaps if they regularly play in the “tournaments” rather than just on a purely casual level in the blitz pools. Maybe I don’t play nearly as much as some, but (playing on lichess) i’ve maybe had <1% games “cancelled” for identified cheating and couldn’t have identified any single one of them. Life’s too short to worry about it. If you play in casual pools you’re going to play opponents around your own rating, cheating or no cheating, and for the vast majority that axiomatically in my mind implies “no cheating” (unless they’re very bad at it). And it wouldn’t make any difference to me if they were.

However anyone who actually plays online when it matters (tournaments with monetary value especially) I say “more fool them”. Of course people are going to be cheating in those, and I wouldn’t remotely surprised if this includes some of the strongest players in the world, and even in high profile events.

[Roger de Coverly]

If you play in casual pools you’re going to play opponents around your own rating, cheating or no cheating, and for the vast majority that axiomatically in my mind implies “no cheating” (unless they’re very bad at it). And it wouldn’t make any difference to me if they were.

I could believe that the likelihood of playing someone who uses computer assistance decreases with the move rate and how serious is the game.

But otherwise, how does a lower rated player distinguish between being outplayed by a stonger player and outplayed by an engine?

[Ian Thompson]

But otherwise, how does a lower rated player distinguish between being outplayed by a stonger player and outplayed by an engine?

Suspicions are likely to arise if the positional play of your opponent is not particularly good, but their tactical play is outstanding, particularly if simple wins are spurned in favour of complex tactical ones.

[Nick Ivell]

Online chess is fundamentally UNSERIOUS.

[Brian Beattie]

FWIW, I've found that in the Lichess Classical time control versus opponents in the 2100-2299 range that about one in fifteen (6-7%) of them ultimately get banned. Typically, the ones that are banned have relatively new accounts (within 2 months).

[Chris Rice]

Ruben Nunez drew with Kramnik and was immediately labelled a cheat and he's just one of a long line of chess players Kramnik has accused and his heartfelt response is below. As I understand it FIDE has no reach into online chess so Nunez or whoever else can't refer him to the Ethics Committee. Chess.com don't seem inclined to ban him and even if they did that probably wouldn't stop him from accusing players without any verification so there doesn't seem to be any way to punish him unless of course he becomes the subject of mockery which will be a very sad state of affairs for a former World Champion.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

I think this is IM Rubén Domingo Núñez (Rutricks):

https://www.chess.com/member/rutricks

[NickFaulks]

As I understand it FIDE has no reach into online chess so Nunez or whoever else can't refer him to the Ethics Committee.

I don't think that is necessarily true, and he should certainly try. He won't, of course.