Point one: I don't believe in "sin." That's a religious concept. Religion is the number one human problem. Point two: For every five people complaining about cheaters, there is probably one cheater. Mostly it is inadequate people who want an excuse for their loss. Point three: What the f**k do I care about my "rating"? That's just an artificial number some people use to determine their self-worth. It's fun to compete around it, like the score in a ball game, but it has almost nothing to do with who I am.
For what it's worth, I've been on Lichess for over 2 years and over the past 10 weeks, I've noticed a significant uptick in what appears to be cheating. I have reported several players in the past 2 years who have been banned shortly thereafter. Also, a standard disclaimer to keep things in perspective: Even with the rise in cheating these past 10 weeks, cheating players remain a small minority. If I had to quantify it, I'd say my suspicions are aroused lately by 1 in 10 players, while previously it was something about half that number.
Before reporting a player, I do a lot of research on his game history, looking at a minimum of 10 games (but often more). If I'm not reasonably certain cheating is going on, I don't make the report. In my reports, I provide links to at least 5 recent games (but again, often more).
One difference in the cheating I'm seeing lately: It seems more casual. Rather than a player obviously using an engine for every move, it seems to me that some of these newer "lockdown" cheaters are playing a chess phone app alongside their Lichess games for "help," occasionally deviating from what the phone app is suggesting. This makes it significantly harder, but not impossible, to detect the cheater (at least for a human). One tell? The player makes 1 or 2 amateurish blunders early in the game, then plays with grandmaster precision for the rest of his moves.
But again, to keep things in perspective: Even with the uptick in suspicious game play, I don't think cheaters constitute any more than 10% of the players, tops.
Before reporting a player, I do a lot of research on his game history, looking at a minimum of 10 games (but often more). If I'm not reasonably certain cheating is going on, I don't make the report. In my reports, I provide links to at least 5 recent games (but again, often more).
One difference in the cheating I'm seeing lately: It seems more casual. Rather than a player obviously using an engine for every move, it seems to me that some of these newer "lockdown" cheaters are playing a chess phone app alongside their Lichess games for "help," occasionally deviating from what the phone app is suggesting. This makes it significantly harder, but not impossible, to detect the cheater (at least for a human). One tell? The player makes 1 or 2 amateurish blunders early in the game, then plays with grandmaster precision for the rest of his moves.
But again, to keep things in perspective: Even with the uptick in suspicious game play, I don't think cheaters constitute any more than 10% of the players, tops.
@sparowe14 #151
On spot comment. The Glicko-2 rating system is unnecessarily complicated, and assume constant playing and winning/losing streaks, standard deviation and/or varience, getting or losing 500 points in few first games quite easely, after that it is extremely diffcult to "back on track"... Thus "Artificially inflating or deflating your rating" is more than possible and exploited by this troll, carefully using slow games and playing againts beginners.
The second problem I have noticed here are BOTs. It is allowed to play rated games with. The issue is that some BOTs are extremely weak, however with extremely high rating. Playing rated games with a BOTs should be forbidden.
As well, some people as this troll are amazingly weird with their "superiority complex". If not playing chess professionally or at least on top level, rating is poinless, but some people have a need to present themselves as a "superior beings"... Does ring a bell to anyone here what such attitude bring us in far and recent history?
Chess is just a game and nothing else, many of people play it just for fun and on amateur level, without deeper understanding nor studying. Thus it is quite ammusing to see such statement of this troll, that he is literaly learn how pieces moves 20 minutes before he is registers here, but instantly played perfectly each game, at least as CM. Without knowing oppenings, strategy, tactic and engames. That is clear to anyone who ever studied chess that is practically impossible no matter how his IQ is.
But now I have notice this troll is not new at all here. All in all, some people are so weird...
On spot comment. The Glicko-2 rating system is unnecessarily complicated, and assume constant playing and winning/losing streaks, standard deviation and/or varience, getting or losing 500 points in few first games quite easely, after that it is extremely diffcult to "back on track"... Thus "Artificially inflating or deflating your rating" is more than possible and exploited by this troll, carefully using slow games and playing againts beginners.
The second problem I have noticed here are BOTs. It is allowed to play rated games with. The issue is that some BOTs are extremely weak, however with extremely high rating. Playing rated games with a BOTs should be forbidden.
As well, some people as this troll are amazingly weird with their "superiority complex". If not playing chess professionally or at least on top level, rating is poinless, but some people have a need to present themselves as a "superior beings"... Does ring a bell to anyone here what such attitude bring us in far and recent history?
Chess is just a game and nothing else, many of people play it just for fun and on amateur level, without deeper understanding nor studying. Thus it is quite ammusing to see such statement of this troll, that he is literaly learn how pieces moves 20 minutes before he is registers here, but instantly played perfectly each game, at least as CM. Without knowing oppenings, strategy, tactic and engames. That is clear to anyone who ever studied chess that is practically impossible no matter how his IQ is.
But now I have notice this troll is not new at all here. All in all, some people are so weird...
@fastlearner50
I grew up in the pre-Internet world of the 1950s to 1970s and you didn't have this stupid "democracy" where no one has to prove their chops. If you have more education, worldly experience, and valid points to boot you are being "superior" to the likes of you. As for MY chops, I have an enormous trophy from 1982 when I won the US Amateur championship in San Mateo, CA. I was a Candidate Master then and then I gave the game up for 30 years until just the last year. I've known, personally, a great many GMs. People of the world I grew up in respected their betters and knew when to shut their pie hole when other people have more experience, background, and a much vaster knowledge base. I'm fairly certain you were in diapers when I was playing guys like Nick de Firmian and Steve Brandwein every week. I *earned* my "superiority complex". You? You're alive during a Dark Age where everyone is emboldened to spout off and their only real qualification is GALL.
@SomewhatUnsound yes. have you seen his games? It's blatant use of engine in all its glory. The problem is time. We have to report the winners today because the sponsor wanted to know the results. We were hoping that they get ban by then to avoid meaningless arguments. He said suspect also flat out deny all the allegations when it's really obvious that he is cheating.
it's not lichess feedback forum
I'm sure you're right @keruya and no criticism intended. It's an awkward situation for sure. I don't think there's a way to 'expedite' requests save an email explaining why this is more than a 'normal' report. Any instance of cheating is frustrating, but this one seems more so than most.
@ keruya
I checked the link you sent and with a number of 13 wins it is not too difficult to figure out who you are refering to. In real like this player has a FIDE rating going up to 2100.
I am not defending this player but one has to be very careful with making accusations. a 300 points gap pays itself back in such games. We, the weaker players make those mistakes that the much better player instantly use to win games.
Winning games is not what to look for. One should look for sacrifices, long mating sequences.
A few weeks ago I reported someone for the first time. It was a 3 minutes game and quickly being a minute up in time I started offering pieces which he turned down and went on to create a checkmate construction. This is all rather normal yet if your rating is 1500 - 1600 and you have a 1,5 minutes left and keep playing best moves......... Human behavior is to grab pawns or pieces, make up for lost time et cetera...... Yet, this opponent knew that all that was not necessary.
Never heard back about this. But do I feel bad now?? Life is too short. Those few rating points I hope to gain back again soon.
I checked the link you sent and with a number of 13 wins it is not too difficult to figure out who you are refering to. In real like this player has a FIDE rating going up to 2100.
I am not defending this player but one has to be very careful with making accusations. a 300 points gap pays itself back in such games. We, the weaker players make those mistakes that the much better player instantly use to win games.
Winning games is not what to look for. One should look for sacrifices, long mating sequences.
A few weeks ago I reported someone for the first time. It was a 3 minutes game and quickly being a minute up in time I started offering pieces which he turned down and went on to create a checkmate construction. This is all rather normal yet if your rating is 1500 - 1600 and you have a 1,5 minutes left and keep playing best moves......... Human behavior is to grab pawns or pieces, make up for lost time et cetera...... Yet, this opponent knew that all that was not necessary.
Never heard back about this. But do I feel bad now?? Life is too short. Those few rating points I hope to gain back again soon.
@kiek333
actually winning games in not one of the criterias we are looking for when making allegations when someone is cheating.
This is the criteria we are using
1. Use of top engine moves/lines
2. Very high move accuracy (due to engine moves)
3. Too many opening repertoire (paired with high accuracy)
4. Massive spike in rating performance
5. Clock interval usage
6. Player history
The one you are referring too fits all of the criteria. I am hoping in a few days time lichess will have dealt with the said individuals.
actually winning games in not one of the criterias we are looking for when making allegations when someone is cheating.
This is the criteria we are using
1. Use of top engine moves/lines
2. Very high move accuracy (due to engine moves)
3. Too many opening repertoire (paired with high accuracy)
4. Massive spike in rating performance
5. Clock interval usage
6. Player history
The one you are referring too fits all of the criteria. I am hoping in a few days time lichess will have dealt with the said individuals.
The games has been reviewed by a GM, a couple of IMs and top players. And by the way, the game is played locally and we know almost all of the participants, so in general we know of the players strengths. Hope this gives you a better perspective on our mindset.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.