@MrTaylor_Mate said in #18:
> Looking at some of my recent games, I can tell that some guys just like to mess around at the end stage, and promote to 2 or three Queens after clearing my material, I can't remember any club game where anyone did that.
Why do you complain when your opponents promote their pawns? You should answer the question of why you are holding on to positions that seem completely lost. I hate it when players like you are disrespectful and don't resign gracefully! And that you accuse your opponent of cheating because of this is really ridiculous!
If you constantly report your opponents for such reasons, I can understand very well that lichess doesn't take you seriously anymore.
Is some@Tenakel said in #21:
> Why do you complain when your opponents promote their pawns?
>
> If you constantly report your opponents for such reasons, I can understand very well that lichess doesn't take you seriously anymore.
Is this supposed to be the start of a silly little argument or something, you know Tenakel, do you mean a tool or some type of greeting?
Now you go look up the word knob kopf....greetings
Oh hi there it's me , in going to go with the flow and suck up to lichess, because here it's such a cosy atmosphere, they are all so cheerful, ahhh cut the bollocks.....
@MrTaylor_Mate said in #18:
> As much as I like this lichess place, it's more like a playground than something I'd consider to be a site dedicated to the battle of Chess.
> I know there are so many good players in real life, so I'm not arguing about that.
> Looking at some of my recent games, I can tell that some guys just like to mess around at the end stage, and promote to 2 or three Queens after clearing my material, I can't remember any club game where anyone did that.
> And what does this mean, those messing around guys, are so good at refuting my opening strategies, that it seems like they are really just taking the micky.... because if you're so good at the beginning why would you want to drag the game out by making nonsensical moves?
> I want to win or at least draw, as quickly as possible... not drag the game out....
> Anyway happy cheating....it's a special occasion , so I bought you some more sophisticated tools , try them they'll struggle to catch you...
I see you are a good person, my apologies if was too much irony in my first comment. Online chess is different from chess on the board, the proof is that some time controls and variants only exist online.
of course it all depends on the situation, but sometimes the opponent will troll you with an absurd checkmate or promote all his pawns. moreover, some players make online challenges (even between pros!) to have funny checkmates or awful positions. Just in online. Magnus Carlsen has already played openings online that would undoubtedly make Steinitz and Capablanca explode with rage if they were not dead. so I'm not talking about all the chess players and streamers doing at least that or worse. I don't do that, I just try to checkmate my opponent as fast as possible, and also in the safest way for me, so I've already promoted a second pawn to queen because checkmate will be faster than with one queen and my king. I am for a form of politeness at the opening and I therefore avoid bongclouds and other openings of this kind in tournaments (except in tournaments where you have to start with a different first move in each game or thematical). there's one thing in particular that might horrify you - the lefong - a quick early move, usually a bishop, your opponent premoves and you premove too, you attack castling and you win a rook for free. it doesn't exist in Over the board, I sometimes do it if the control time is fast, but the only excuse for me is that it rarely works more than once per opponent. but apart from 1/2+0, 1+0 (and 3+0 or 3+2 if Berserk), nobody does it in incremental controls and slow controls. it's a face of online chess, I'm not perfect either, but in control times similar to Over the board chess, I "respect the time control" and I play as close as possible to Over the board.
Greeting !
@MrTaylor_Mate said in #10:
>anyone looking for a serious competition should avoid this site
Well, anyone genuinely looking for "serious competition" should probably look elsewhere than playing quick games online.
Public service announcement for dissatisfied Lichess customers:
Lichess is aware that not all customers feel they are getting full value for their paid subscription. Therefore, Lichess offers a 100% moneyback satisfaction guarantee. If you are dissatisfied with your Lichess experience in anyway whatsoever, you can go to your profile, settings, close account. And within 48 hours 100% of your paid subscription will be refunded.
@C-Bear said in #20:
> It in't allowed to name and shame cheaters on this site so to do what you ask is not allowed.
who said i had to name the people who cheated i just say out of the x games played y had cheaters
and out of the a players b where cheats and liches caught c no names nothing
The problem with that is what constitutes a cheat. FIDE says anybody with outside help. Lichess says well, we want to be sure so we penalize not at the point of outside help, even when that is fairly certain, but we want more statistical evidence. I think that is what this continuing discussion is about. Lichess isn't interested in banning players so they set the bar before banning higher than what FIDE does and also don't really look that well for cheaters.
The end result is a lot of cheaters on this site and the players who complain on the forums.
These whiners on the forums are just a gang of people upset over their chess performance or holding any other silly grudge.
On the opposite there are also the people crying out over the banning of their friend or GM idol, and they make up conspiracy theories like Lichess bans 100 people every day for fun, or they deny Lichess any decision-making power because Lichess "cannot prove cheating".
Lichess is interested in the best decisions possible, and they have a very skilled team for it, so both of these extreme ways of thinking are dead wrong.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.