Cheating detection absent in lichess

You can create a friend's list of only players with 1k played games or more. The chances of one of these being a casual cheater is pretty low, since they accumulated 1.000+ games without a ban.

It depends on what you mean by that:

• if you mean "does lichess check if people are cheating?" Yes;
• if you mean "does lichess put money checks to catch cheaters?" I'm not sure;
• if you mean "did @lichess check @cheating? No, it would appear not.

Too bad.

@Morobiondo said in #10:

Hey, do not fool around, has lichess checks on cheating? Yes or not?

Wouldn't it be a coincidence that there are more honest players on Lichess? You seem to not have used the report system much, so I think it's because you have faced fewer dishonest players here than elsewhere. Lichess systematically monitors and verifies whether there is cheating or not. Lichess has a program capable of detecting any type of cheating, and human moderators systematically check what is happening. but if a player has suspicions about an opponent, Lichess offers the reporting system and everything is 100% examined by humans
Greeting

@CSKA_Moscou said in #14:

Wouldn't it be a coincidence that there are more honest players on Lichess? You seem to not have used the report system much, so I think it's because you have faced fewer dishonest players here than elsewhere. Lichess systematically monitors and verifies whether there is cheating or not. Lichess has a program capable of detecting any type of cheating, and human moderators systematically check what is happening. but if a player has suspicions about an opponent, Lichess offers the reporting system and everything is 100% examined by humans
Greeting

more honest players on Lichess? - Based on what you say that?

You seem to not have used the report system much - True, I never used that because I think it is not rigth to report on people
just on a suspicius basis

I signed up in lichess to play chess, that's it. I think it is a platform's duty to monitor and intervene in the case of a verified abuse, like in chess.com indeed.

@Morobiondo said in #15:

more honest players on Lichess? - Based on what you say that?

You seem to not have used the report system much - True, I never used that because I think it is not rigth to report on people
just on a suspicius basis

I signed up in lichess to play chess, that's it. I think it is a platform's duty to monitor and intervene in the case of a verified abuse, like in chess.com indeed.

well what are you basing this on when you say that green site players are more banned than here?

do you have figures, tables? probably not. Me niether. but from what you say the green site does bans more regularly - is it a guarantee of quality to know that one in four opponents or somethings like that is going to be banned? I don't think so, but I understand your point of view which remains intelligent and constructive.

the reporting system does not harm anyone, some reports end without action since everything is controlled by humans and if there is no proof that there is cheating, there cannot be have a ban. here again your point of view is interesting, it is true that I have never heard anything like this about the reporting system, but you should not be afraid of it, it is ethical and secure, know that when you make a report you're not just helping mods, you're helping the entire Lichess community. Lichess is a site on a human scale and moderation is done through human mods but there are more players than mods on Lichess, so they can't have an eye everywhere (even if they try to do so as much as possible! ), so the reporting system allows mods to study cases more quickly and make appropriate decisions. in any case, it seems to me that a confidential report (player contacting the mods) is more ethical than chat when players debate publicly about who cheated or not (fortunately public shamming is also prohibited on Lichess). like I said, there is computer stuff to review games, so unlike other sites, Lichess mods have to check and review cases to make the best decision possible (and not to push a "ban" button without checking the case) Besides, what is even more ethical is that Lichess has an appeal system so that players can contest a decision!

@Morobiondo said in #1:

I have 100+ games on chess.com and 10 cheaters
And i have 200+ games on lichsss with 1 cheater does this mean lichess is better.

No because sample size and the fact more bans or cheats detected is good and bad. Good they saw it but bad because there is more cheats.

The only way to get some real data to compare is to take all the games for a month from both sites run it through a third party cheat detection and then see how many of those the sites bad and also whats the chances of playing a cheater.

Doing this will give us alot of valuable info into which is better unlike personal opinions and meaning less data like 6k games and no cheats

instead, I think nore than 6k games and no cheats is a very meaningfull data

@Morobiondo said in #18:

instead, I think nore than 6k games and no cheats is a very meaningfull data

last month ther was 96,118,124 games
6000/96,118,124 * 100 = 0.00624231908% of the games
to call that Representative of the user experience would be foolish
as it is a fraction of a percent of the games of 1 month

Plus as i alluded to before 6k games with no cheaters does not tell us anything
all 6k games could have cheaters that were not found
or some or none

and without knowing that we cant tell if 6k being none is good because you played none
or bad because none were caught.

I am regularly refunded rating points for rapid games lost to people who violated the lichess rules (by cheating I guess). My rough estimation is one game in 200.