How likely is a game with 0 inaccuracies to be played by a U2000 human?

@testaccount42 ofc I got outplayed camon...

@Kusokosla What do you mean by b:c6? Anyway I don't think he gave me a 'big advantage' at any moment

@tpr As I said I don't know if he was cheating or not so I don't want to report someone just because I'm suspicious, I'll just wait and maybe lichess thinks he was.

@ARA234 Right now checking the game again I think 22. ... Kc6 was the best way to get out of the pin and 25. ... Rh5 feel somewhat better to defend the pawn than Ra8 and those decisions can be human made I guess.

@jzehner4192 @Manchineel I don't think I've ever done a 0 innacuracy game (maybe veery short ones) but definitely not past 20 moves

Btw, how does lichess detect if someone is using an engine external to the computer while playing, like doing the opponent moves against stockfish 8 on your mobile? It can't, right?

Artichoke96, What I meant is Bishop takes c6 would give you a big advantage due to blacks crippled pawns.

@Artichoke96
If the enemy does not set difficult tasks for us, if you don’t need to calculate difficult options, then what should we be wrong about? Chess is a logical game.

I always strive to play on the first line. It’s not surprising that from a thousand attempts it sometimes turns out.

It is a little suspect, you can have 0-0-0 without playing the best move every time however black played near perfect every time. In a 10-0 game that's not easy to do. I've had some 1-0-0 and 2-0-0 games but they were longer time controls. Based on other games they have played this doesn't seem to follow suit of their normal play. The last game was a 4-5-1.

Pretty proud on this one :D i just played

Friends, colleagues! Can any of you answer: A simulator can cheat?

Depends on strength of opposition. 11 mistakes isn't exactly a strong opposition...I have a 2 ACPL game myself :p I generally also consider move times; Irwin consider PV, blur and style as well. As far as move times go...Both players should take more time to think; two thirds of time is still remaining on the clock for both.

But rather than posting that game, I shall poke at low-rated analysed games on your own profile and....Well, 0-1-0 as 1400? Eh, close enough to "can u2000 play 000"



@ucjn: Heh at that 19 to 24th move descend. Reminds me of this study: lichess.org/study/0TKpkEtZ - same game that got 1-0-0 in most recent blog got 3-0-0 in different analysis.

I beat a 2000 player with 5 centipawn loss. They were just playing bad. Spent 42 seconds on not seeing mate in 1.



Accusing people just from centipawn loss isn't good.

Here's 3 centipawn loss over 20 moves against an 1850.


Things go well occasionally. For every 1 of those games are 100 horrible losses.

You, my friends, underestimate the role of theory. For most chess lovers, chess is a purely calculating game. But not only the one who thinks better wins, but also the one who better assesses the position. Even the chess engine cannot calculate the whole game to the end - it is limited by the power of the computer. Thus, on equal hardware, the engine that has the best evaluation function will win. Players of the first rank evaluate certain positions in the same way as the grandmaster. And, if the calculation is not complicated, then the devil himself cannot play better.

I think this game is probably worth reporting and let the mods take a look at it. The opponent plays 0-0-0 which is unusual in and of itself, but that coupled with the very consistent move times (3-5 seconds per move with very little variation) looks quite suspicious to me.