I think lichess is a better place to play chess.
chess.com has many economic interests
chess.com has many economic interests
@Daydread said in #10:
> Again, i don't believe it is as popular as OP makes it seem.
My point exactly. Sure, there may be specific sandbaggers trying to emulate low rated players plausibly enough to avoid detection long term. I can imagine people doing it just for the fun and satisfaction of being able to mimic weak players without being caught. But I don't believe there would be too many people like that - and comment #1 sounds as its author were meeting loads of these all the time. Isn't it way more likely that these players who play like weak players - or at least vast majority of them - rather are what they seem to be, i.e. actual weak players?
> Again, i don't believe it is as popular as OP makes it seem.
My point exactly. Sure, there may be specific sandbaggers trying to emulate low rated players plausibly enough to avoid detection long term. I can imagine people doing it just for the fun and satisfaction of being able to mimic weak players without being caught. But I don't believe there would be too many people like that - and comment #1 sounds as its author were meeting loads of these all the time. Isn't it way more likely that these players who play like weak players - or at least vast majority of them - rather are what they seem to be, i.e. actual weak players?
Less than 100 games, claims he's seen a lot of players. I doubt he can post 1 game where he's seen sandbagging.
@author_of_vinczeswis
1. You are not the OP of this thread.
2. The player you mentioned is new, has a rating of 2352 with 37 games, so basically hardly possible to sandbag at all.
3. The player you mentioned never played the OP. Who has a rating of below 900, BTW.
4. What you do is public shaming and not allowed. And that's without looking at your (probably pretty premature) conclusions.
1. You are not the OP of this thread.
2. The player you mentioned is new, has a rating of 2352 with 37 games, so basically hardly possible to sandbag at all.
3. The player you mentioned never played the OP. Who has a rating of below 900, BTW.
4. What you do is public shaming and not allowed. And that's without looking at your (probably pretty premature) conclusions.
> nadjarostowa:
> What you do is public shaming and not allowed.
In that case, MrStrandMan's question could not be answered. When I listed 2 suspect games, I actually listed a suspect player. Sorry.
> What you do is public shaming and not allowed.
In that case, MrStrandMan's question could not be answered. When I listed 2 suspect games, I actually listed a suspect player. Sorry.
@author_of_vinczeswis said in #16:
> In that case, MrStrandMan's question could not be answered. When I listed 2 suspect games, I actually listed a suspect player. Sorry.
Who are you? I wasn't talking to you, but MikeSturgess. How, or even why would you answer my rhetorical question? #AltAccount
> In that case, MrStrandMan's question could not be answered. When I listed 2 suspect games, I actually listed a suspect player. Sorry.
Who are you? I wasn't talking to you, but MikeSturgess. How, or even why would you answer my rhetorical question? #AltAccount
@MrStrandMan said in #16:
> Who are you? I wasn't talking to you
Everything else aside. This is a dumb thing to say on a public forum. You are talking to everyone here. Head to private messages if you don't want others to chime in.
> Who are you? I wasn't talking to you
Everything else aside. This is a dumb thing to say on a public forum. You are talking to everyone here. Head to private messages if you don't want others to chime in.
@MrStrandMan said in #16:
>Who are you? I wasn't talking to you
Yes, I responded to a rhetorical question (MrStrandMan: I doubt he can post 1 game where he's seen sandbagging) in this public forum.
I gave a specific example of manipulation of the rating (that's the message number 14 deleted by the admins) ... my post 14 was deleted because I named a certain player who probably manipulates the rating ... according to the admins I violated the terms of LiChess because the player I am not allowed to state. So I wrote that MrStrandMan's question could not be answered.
>Who are you? I wasn't talking to you
Yes, I responded to a rhetorical question (MrStrandMan: I doubt he can post 1 game where he's seen sandbagging) in this public forum.
I gave a specific example of manipulation of the rating (that's the message number 14 deleted by the admins) ... my post 14 was deleted because I named a certain player who probably manipulates the rating ... according to the admins I violated the terms of LiChess because the player I am not allowed to state. So I wrote that MrStrandMan's question could not be answered.
You are all assuming I'm on about my own games, we have a group of us that play on here and I just find it incredible there are people complaining about the fact I've complained about it. Funny how none of you complained when Magnus called someone out for cheating wasn't it. You was all very silent then.....wonder why
@MikeSturgess said in #19:
> You are all assuming I'm on about my own games,
Well...
@MikeSturgess said in #1:
> I tried this site for a little while after using chess.com and I have to say I've never seen so many players that have manipulated their ratings to compete and try new things on lower players, it's awful.
... I think it is reasonable to assume you mean your own games, isn't it?
After all, how could anyone comment about some vague accusation that nonody even has a chance to look into? And if it is so common, why didn't you see it in your games, then?
> Funny how none of you complained when Magnus called someone out for cheating wasn't it. You was all very silent then.....wonder why
That's nothing but whataboutism, and you are wrong on this one as well.
> You are all assuming I'm on about my own games,
Well...
@MikeSturgess said in #1:
> I tried this site for a little while after using chess.com and I have to say I've never seen so many players that have manipulated their ratings to compete and try new things on lower players, it's awful.
... I think it is reasonable to assume you mean your own games, isn't it?
After all, how could anyone comment about some vague accusation that nonody even has a chance to look into? And if it is so common, why didn't you see it in your games, then?
> Funny how none of you complained when Magnus called someone out for cheating wasn't it. You was all very silent then.....wonder why
That's nothing but whataboutism, and you are wrong on this one as well.