How do you tell they're cheaters?
Hover over no.6, no.8, no.11 for example. Then you'll see how programme-zero can tell. I assume an error or oversight in whatever script compiles the top 200 (I understand not such technology).
23 of the top 200 - that's 11.5%.
A) Shocking number
B) Why are they listed there? They shouldn't be on the ranking list.
A) Shocking number
B) Why are they listed there? They shouldn't be on the ranking list.
100% agree. I've said many times there should be a separate list for programs.
I don't get it - how do you tell that no. 6, no.8 or no. 11 are programs???
Hovering over their names just pops up the normal rating summary, what do I miss?
Hovering over their names just pops up the normal rating summary, what do I miss?
Bug already corrected ?
@programme-zero:
The "bug" is obviously corrected.
But at least it was interesting to see that there are 11,5 % of already caught cheaters in Top 200 classical, that fits into my experience that 10-20 % cheating is very probable if you play classical chess (especially in higher rating range).
Thats of course a sad thing but dont forget that most players are still playing fair!
Best wishes
Nada
The "bug" is obviously corrected.
But at least it was interesting to see that there are 11,5 % of already caught cheaters in Top 200 classical, that fits into my experience that 10-20 % cheating is very probable if you play classical chess (especially in higher rating range).
Thats of course a sad thing but dont forget that most players are still playing fair!
Best wishes
Nada
Sorry to potentially start yet another argument but #8 is inaccurate; these numbers do not actually fit with 10-20% of all classical players cheating, it fits with 10 to 20 of the top players having been engine users until they were caught. Generalizing the statistics of the top 200 players on the site to hold as a trend that continues all the way to the bottom is just illogical here.
Sure there are more people attempting to cheat classical than any other clock variant I'm sure because it's harder to detect in long clocks and they can still pretend to be ranked and get trophies and such; I'm definitely not saying there aren't cheaters. However, it's highly unlikely you'll ever see one of these cheaters outside of a tournament if your rating is under 1800, except maybe being unfortunate enough to catch them once or twice as they sail swiftly into the 2000+ range.
So basically if the majority of players 1800 or less are not engines, that would mean there are tens upon tens of thousands of players not cheating. And if only 10 or 20 cheaters made that top 200 when engine users are likely to be the best players on the site unless they are caught before they get there, and many of the ones caught prior to rising are repeat engines because they are easier to autoflag almost immediately, that would mean that the liklihood of engines beyond those 10-20 cheaters actually falls quite significantly. This makes an estimate of 10-20% of the entire user base of classical players being cheaters a gross exaggeration.
23 players out of over 20,000 verified so far. You'll have to compile a much stronger list to evidence 10-20% of all players versus what the mods tell us (which is closer to 1-2% of all players on the site, which still wouldn't make 10-20% of classical I don't think if every single cheater were only in classical).
Sure there are more people attempting to cheat classical than any other clock variant I'm sure because it's harder to detect in long clocks and they can still pretend to be ranked and get trophies and such; I'm definitely not saying there aren't cheaters. However, it's highly unlikely you'll ever see one of these cheaters outside of a tournament if your rating is under 1800, except maybe being unfortunate enough to catch them once or twice as they sail swiftly into the 2000+ range.
So basically if the majority of players 1800 or less are not engines, that would mean there are tens upon tens of thousands of players not cheating. And if only 10 or 20 cheaters made that top 200 when engine users are likely to be the best players on the site unless they are caught before they get there, and many of the ones caught prior to rising are repeat engines because they are easier to autoflag almost immediately, that would mean that the liklihood of engines beyond those 10-20 cheaters actually falls quite significantly. This makes an estimate of 10-20% of the entire user base of classical players being cheaters a gross exaggeration.
23 players out of over 20,000 verified so far. You'll have to compile a much stronger list to evidence 10-20% of all players versus what the mods tell us (which is closer to 1-2% of all players on the site, which still wouldn't make 10-20% of classical I don't think if every single cheater were only in classical).
@Fenris:
I have not said that 10-20 % of classical players are cheating, I said that 10-20 % of cheating (in higher rating range!) is probable. Thats a big difference.
Example: I often found players cheated by one opponent 2-4 times, maybe this cheater has even more than one account and so its very probable that a small amount of cheaters are causing many cheating cases.
I assume that probably not more than 3-5% of classical players are cheating regularly.
Best wishes
Nada
I have not said that 10-20 % of classical players are cheating, I said that 10-20 % of cheating (in higher rating range!) is probable. Thats a big difference.
Example: I often found players cheated by one opponent 2-4 times, maybe this cheater has even more than one account and so its very probable that a small amount of cheaters are causing many cheating cases.
I assume that probably not more than 3-5% of classical players are cheating regularly.
Best wishes
Nada
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.