11 average cpl in a 44 move correspondence game??

I don't want to publicly call out a possible cheater,
but is an average centipawn loss of 11 (0 inaccuracies) in a correspondence possible? (for a non-titled player)

Should I just report him/her and trust Lichess' anti-cheating detection?
(I get the suspicion that correspondence games are often dodging the detection)

Is there an easy way to share games without showing the names of the players?

I like correspondence. I haven't played an enormous amount, but I've successfully reported 2 cheaters already. It's pretty easy to spot. Depending on the users other ratings (puzzle, blitz, bullet) you should be able to make a personal decision about whether their play is worth reporting as suspicious.

Also though, remember, it is correspondence, so they should (should :p) make far less blunders and mistakes than usual!

When in doubt, I say report. If it's nothing, life goes on. If Lichess' system detects a cheater, get him out of here!

I just played a correspondence game yesterday where BOTH of us had 0,0,0 ( inaccuracies,mistakes, blunders).

Nobody cheated.

That said - I can spot cheaters fairly well - not perfectly - and I have reported many of them and got them banned.

You can tell they're cheating when they make moves that don't make sense but they end up working.

For example, they attack one of your squares, such as b7, then they make five different unrelated attacks (intermezzos) on different squares and then they finally capture on b7.

Engines optimize chess play, but a human would never do that. We would just make maybe one other intermezzo and then capture on b7.

@QueenMyPawn That's exactly it. When a low-rated player players a bunch of non-sensical looking moves that in retrospect turn out to be extremely deep - it's a dead giveaway.

This is the game (no players are mentioned)