@ delasked ...Chess engines are "new" to the world of chess, relatively speaking. Engines rated equal to the top players is even newer. Chess has been around for 500+ years. This phenomenon of "cheating" using computers is NEW in that context. Your claim of 10 years makes it sound as if it's been around forever. Internet chess in itself is still relatively new in the overall history of chess.
And yes... Sargon's claim of the "detection methods" being used is very correct. Do your research on the matter.
delasked wrote:
"In the end, whatever the method or its accuracy, we don't have any system of checks and balances. We have to trust the methods, the systems and the people who make decisions based on those. Completely opaque systems. Unaccountable. And in these types of problems we shouldn't rely on trust!"
One word... Ignorance
The methods employed are accountable, checks and balances are in place. You can be assured the tagging of players is taken very seriously leaving no doubt.
i totally agree with the OP , and the damage induced by the understandable goal to get rid of cheaters(who waste our time and the pleasure to play with genuine people and not computers)could lid to more devastating troubles. Imao the cure(excluding cheaters, etc...) might be even worse than the problem
@Catastrovj'ai éclaté de rire quand j'ai vu votre nom. Impossible de vous joindre pour une petite partie...
Sorry to all, this is the only place I could adress Catastrov...
From outsider's perspective cheating insanity does look a bit bizarre. Naturally new players think they're playing cheaters when losing, because forums are filled with discussions about how everyone's cheating. For example, I've seen people say that there's no point in playing anything slower than bullet (or fast blitz), because it's the only way to be sure the game is fair.
@delasked "The most famous computer chess engines (stockfish, komodo, houdini) are at least 10 years old."
Actually, Komodo and Houdini were first released in 2010 and Stockfish in 2008 (2007 if you count Glaurung 2).
I've never suspected anyone I've played against of cheating.
Cheating hysteria has been damaging the chess community for over a decade. Nothing new about it.
@Vempele I'd say you've been lucky not to play any cheats in your time here, though that's not to say it's endemic.
I've played about 2,500 games here and I reckon between 5 and 10 of my opponents have cheated against me (most of them were caught pretty soon after).
I got accused of cheating myself for the first time recently - to be honest I took it as a compliment!
Laugh at the original poster.
Rating literally means NOTHING on lichess.
The 1400 rating user probably has that rating so he can play in 1500 tournaments. LOTS of users stay under 1700 or 1500 for this very reason; plus tournaments have little impact on your rating; so one can play a ton of tournaments and stay the same rating; while if they played the same rated people outside the tourny they'd be way higher.
The user you are referring to; upon looking at his tourny history; has won...a lot of tournies; 1700/1500. So I'd say I'm right there.
Cheating 'hysteria' is a bit of a joke. Its not hysteria. Its a fact. Online chess is rampant with engine users. Its the price of playing.
One could choose to ignore high ranking people like that user does; I dont blame him. Personally; I look at games. If someone is hitting 0/0/0 games on a regular basis I have no interest in playing them. Either they use a engine, or they are way above my caliber anyway; so whats the point.
Long story short; rating means nothing....literally nothing at all.
There are people on lichess with <1000rating than can rival 2K+ players. There are 2K+ players that absolutely suck and got the rating from only playing users they can win against; over and over; or boosting.
Ignore rating; concentrate on the point of what someone is saying.
Engine use isnt even up for argument. Its a fact. And thats OK.
But no reason to pretend otherwise.
Side note; since I started playing on lichess about a month ago. I have 16 cheaters I reported that were banned.
So...yea. That amount in a month. And no, I'm not some goofball that reports everyone who beats me. I have probably reported 20 people max; so like 90% call out rate.
All this being said; I totally agree with the user who said trying to find a fix for this problem could be worse than the problem itself.
As I said in previous post; I feel like its the cost of playing online chess; one I'm happy to pay.