Cheating in chess

[Kevin Thurlow]

"That's different from lichess then. They only tell you you got some points back, but not from which game."

They did the same, but as I have only played a few times on chess.com (and even better, someone told me which event it was!) it wasn't difficult to find the red mark of shame/abuse.

"My understanding is that if they identify a player as a cheat, all their games get reversed (even if there is nothing suspicious about that game in particular), on the basis that cheating in one game casts doubt on all your others."

That is logical (assuming they're right).

I wasn't suspicious about the game at all. Now, I might think he was a bit low-rated to zoom down a main-line, but I did play someone graded 110 in the London League 25 years ago, and I forgot the theory before he did!

[Michael Farthing]

So the best way of cheating on chess.com is to seek out good players you suspect of cheating and play them as much as possible. In time they will be found out and you'll get lots of free yummy rating points!

[JustinHorton]

What can you say, sometimes even weaker players know a lot of theory. Maybe they've played the same lines for many years, maybe sometimes the opponent stumbles into a line that for whatever reason they know well.

You do wonder sometimes about the ability of algorithms to cope with outliers, and although we've been reassured quite a lot of times on this forum, by people who have clearly thought about it, that the systems are conservative and do not leap to disqualify people, it's hard to have real confidence in them in the circumstances where (a) they remain secret and (b) people get disqualified wrongly.

[JustinHorton]

So the best way of cheating on chess.com is to seek out good players you suspect of cheating and play them as much as possible. In time they will be found out and you'll get lots of free yummy rating points!

I mentioned this before but on lichess, if you lose to somebody who is later disqualified, you only get back a proportion of the points you lost to them, so this gambit may not succeed in all arenas

[NickFaulks]

I mentioned this before but on lichess, if you lose to somebody who is later disqualified, you only get back a proportion of the points you lost to them, so this gambit may not succeed in all arenas

Does anyone care about lichess rating points anyway? If so, why?

[JustinHorton]

Well I don't much because nearly all my games are casual, but one could say the same about ECF grades, no?

[NickFaulks]

I suppose it's the anonymity of the opponents which removes most of the interest I might have.

This also means that I don't really care about cheating. If I am playing an opponent called earwig88 rated 1750, then this is probably someone worth 1750 but it might be someone worth 1350 who is using a computer to augment their rating by 400 points. So what?

[Kevin Thurlow]

"This also means that I don't really care about cheating. If I am playing an opponent called earwig88 rated 1750, then this is probably someone worth 1750 but it might be someone worth 1350 who is using a computer to augment their rating by 400 points. "

I have the same view, but obviously not everyone would agree. The other thing is that you start with a 1500 rating (I think), so maybe they haven't played much. I have difficulty remembering any gradings or ratings, partly as there are so many of them. I only play fun chess online, so don't care if I'm 1500, 2000 or 2900.

[Matt Bridgeman]

I suppose the care level is a bit higher if you’ve committed to a weekend long 4NCL Online Congress or a week long Glorney Gilbert International Online, where people are using their real names and really should know better than to be jumping on their engines.

[David Sedgwick]

I suppose the care level is a bit higher if you’ve committed to a weekend long 4NCL Online Congress or a week long Glorney Gilbert International Online, where people are using their real names and really should know better than to be jumping on their engines.

I understand that at least one English player cheated in the Glorney Gilbert. If that is correct, then any such players let down their team mates and let down their country.

I would like to see them banned from representing England internationally, both online and OTB, for a period of time. perhaps until the expiry of 12 months following the return of OTB international team competitions.

[Matt Bridgeman]

A least two from England, two from Wales (I think), multiple bans from the Netherlands, and one blatant case from Belgium I heard about. I’m not sure about Ireland. I think Scotland ran a pretty clean team. At a guess the England players might be facing a 5 event online ban, but I’m not sure if 4NCL Online rules were in effect. It was all bang out of order, and I’d hope the culprits don’t get to wear England vests for a couple of years in over the board chess.

[Mick Norris]

ECF Juniors code of conduct

Sufficient or deficient?

[NickFaulks]

I feel rather sorry for British juniors at the moment. I would advise them to avoid official online events, but might this hamper their prospects when we return to proper chess?

[Roger de Coverly]

Sufficient or deficient?

It's from January 2020, so no mention of official online events.

For online events presumably something about not seeking external assistance during play may be needed. Whether parents or others would be willing or even able to enforce this might be another matter.

[Matt Bridgeman]

Official events still probably have the best chances for an honest competition. I have high hopes for the next 4NCL Online Congress! You have to get your long plays from somewhere.