There are many imperfections in that game that he played, but probably the biggest mistake was 22.Qxg4. The obvious best move was 22.Qxb7+.
In the rules write-up I assisted with, I suggested that "cheating" is okay if you do it only in casual games where you make sure your opponent knows you're not playing normally, but thibault really
never added much cheat detection for casual games. The agreement from him is that cheating has to involve playing for points; therefore while we can discourage it, we can't act against it.
There are many imperfections in that game that he played, but probably the biggest mistake was 22.Qxg4. The obvious best move was 22.Qxb7+.
In the rules write-up I assisted with, I suggested that "cheating" is okay if you do it only in casual games where you make sure your opponent knows you're not playing normally, but thibault really
never added much cheat detection for casual games. The agreement from him is that cheating has to involve playing for points; therefore while we can discourage it, we can't act against it.
Victim
Actually it would be a great idea to encourage "cheaters" or engine users to play correspondence games in the form of casual games, but most of them are too dishonest and prefer to take advantage of
the points in rated games in the process. So we can't assume anyone is a "cheater" outside of those.
Lots of minor and medium errors on both sides from that game.
Actually it would be a great idea to encourage "cheaters" or engine users to play correspondence games in the form of casual games, but most of them are too dishonest and prefer to take advantage of
the points in rated games in the process. So we can't assume anyone is a "cheater" outside of those.
Lots of minor and medium errors on both sides from that game.
kimo111 (1439)
gets his wins by refusing to make move when he is about to lose.
this should be ban immediately
kimo111 (1439)
gets his wins by refusing to make move when he is about to lose.
this should be ban immediately
I know it's annoying, but if there is no chess clock, it's the same idea as perpetual check: The game's duration can be prolonged forever.
Kind of like having a debate with somebody. There's nothing saying you can't keep the person you're arguing with waiting for weeks for you to come up with an argument back, as you only bear the
judgement of taking so long to retort.
I know it's annoying, but if there is no chess clock, it's the same idea as perpetual check: The game's duration can be prolonged forever.
Kind of like having a debate with somebody. There's nothing saying you can't keep the person you're arguing with waiting for weeks for you to come up with an argument back, as you only bear the
judgement of taking so long to retort.
but this is beyond pathetic
http://en.lichess.org/analyse/af90avrl
and check his history every single game is followed by abandoning game and then staying online long enough so other player is forced to resign.
but this is beyond pathetic
http://en.lichess.org/analyse/af90avrl
and check his history every single game is followed by abandoning game and then staying online long enough so other player is forced to resign.
I did look at his history. He only abandons games and delays them indefinitely if they're untimed games with no chess clock.
If you and your opponent happen to agree on using no chess clock, it becomes a battle of Internet connections over chess skill if either player decides at any time to test the opponent's patience.
There's nothing to do but to not play unlimited-time games.
I thought this was funny though,
http://en.lichess.org/analyse/4ge6e7r3/black
guy just throws away his knight to me for free,
"Da fuq did I just do"
"All right, back to WoT"
leaves and lets me declare forfeiture without stalling
I can't figure out what his intention was XD
I did look at his history. He only abandons games and delays them indefinitely if they're untimed games with no chess clock.
If you and your opponent happen to agree on using no chess clock, it becomes a battle of Internet connections over chess skill if either player decides at any time to test the opponent's patience.
There's nothing to do but to not play unlimited-time games.
I thought this was funny though,
http://en.lichess.org/analyse/4ge6e7r3/black
guy just throws away his knight to me for free,
"Da fuq did I just do"
"All right, back to WoT"
*leaves and lets me declare forfeiture without stalling*
I can't figure out what his intention was XD
Not sure where the proper place for this is, but could a mod check this game out?
http://en.lichess.org/mgwmcr9f
Thanks.
Not sure where the proper place for this is, but could a mod check this game out?
http://en.lichess.org/mgwmcr9f
Thanks.
It looks probable there.
Do you remember the move times for the player i.e. how long it took to reply with moves that were [basically?] forced? Currently cheating detection features have been disabled, so identifying
cheaters works a bit differently for the time being.
It looks probable there.
Do you remember the move times for the player i.e. how long it took to reply with moves that were [basically?] forced? Currently cheating detection features have been disabled, so identifying
cheaters works a bit differently for the time being.
That guy wasn't cheating, the betazoidberger just played terribly lol
That guy wasn't cheating, the betazoidberger just played terribly lol