If you think somebody is cheating (either using a computer, getting outside help, or creating multiple accounts) then DO NOT make accusations in the forums and DO NOT harrass that member. If you do these things, then YOUR account may be disabled.

The right thing to do it use the Report Abuse link found at the bottom of EVERY page. Then we can investigate and take the appropriate action.

Thank you! 

Gracias. We've seen what drama this can cause....  and I've seen it elsewhere too. Nothing gets more people outraged, polarized, and dramatic than accusations of dishonesty. (If you've ever had experience with editing a wiki, and getting involved in wikipolitics, and wikilawyering and wikiiwantokillmyselftostopthedrama, then you know what I mean.)

what would be the reasoning behind a player resigning after only 3 moves - with no pieces in jeopardy? Looking at his site he does this often.  The game was ended so early that it did not affect either of our ratings.

Maybe he only likes to play certain openings. Perhaps he is just trying to get you into a Fool's Mate.

> what would be the reasoning behind a player resigning after only 3 moves - with no pieces in jeopardy?

 

If you mean the 12-Mar-2008 game that went 1.d4 d5 2.Qd3 Bf5?? 3.Qb5+? c6? 1-0, your opponent had hung his b7-pawn and c6-pawns. Resigning so soon preserved his rating.

likesforests wrote:

> what would be the reasoning behind a player resigning after only 3 moves - with no pieces in jeopardy?

 

If you mean the 12-Mar-2008 game that went 1.d4 d5 2.Qd3 Bf5?? 3.Qb5+? c6? 1-0, your opponent had hung his b7-pawn and c6-pawns. Resigning so soon preserved his rating.

---

Seems like if resign your rating should take be effected, even if you are only a few moves in.  My thought would be the player that resigns should take a full hit against his rating, after all you resign because you believe you are going lose.  The winning player should get a ratings boost for the win, maybe not the full amount, after all the opposing player declared it by resigning.

seuss68> your rating should take be effected, even if you are only a few moves in

 

I agree. As soon as both sides have played a move, the game should be scored. It's odd that in some cases checkmates and resigning don't affect ratings.

To be clear,

I see resigning due to a bad start as TERRIBLE etiquette (said the guy that just threw away his Queen on move 4.  

Personally, I don't see why there is an early resign option (unless it is MUTUALLY agreed by the 2 players).  

 

 

It's nearly impossible to prove cheating at turn-based chess.

Ercan wrote: It's nearly impossible to prove cheating at turn-based chess.

---

 i disagree :)

erik wrote: Ercan wrote: It's nearly impossible to prove cheating at turn-based chess.

---

 i disagree :)

---

 How do you prove it?

Ercan wrote: It's nearly impossible to prove cheating at turn-based chess.

---

 That is SOOOO not true... It's very possible to discern who is cheating and who isn't.. engines don't play anything like humans.

As long as we aren't banning people who look like the 'might' be cheating and only those who we know ARE FOR SURE cheating (lots of sites claim this, apparently very few follow through) then everything is fine. yes a few 'smart' cheaters may slip through the cracks but the site will remain clean without getting any honest people angry. 

I would like there to be a way of outing people who are using programs such as Fritz to play their games. It is obvious to me that most of the top 50 Facebook players are doing this. I have noted that honest FIDE ranked players have pointed out cheaters. It is a farce that  players who are unranked internationally are able to beat high rated international competition.

How is it that a player who has no FIDE ranking is playing like an IM or GM? If they are such good players, then where is their competition record. Lets see it as a parameter for top ranked players to produce an equivalent tournament result and or FIDE rating.

 

Well.. I'm not so sure about that.. there are a lot of good players who have never had a chance to make it into a tournament.. judging cheating like that isn't fair.

 For example.. I've achieved as high as 1997 on another site (which isn't high but it still makes a point) and I've never played in a tournament nor rated match in my life.. never played anywhere other than the small chess club at school, my grandpa's place.. and here at home.

My point is that if you can play chess at FIDE 2400+ level then why are you not making a living by it.. or something close to it.

 

There are a couple of ways to get a high facebook rating. For example; beat a lot of poor players, or be a good player and beat a few higher ranked player, or use a computer.

Under FIDE the last option is not possible.

yeah maybe.. it's hard to make money playin chess though.. maybe at the GM level you should start thinking..

> How is it that a player who has no FIDE ranking is playing like an IM or GM?

 

Correspondence chess and over-the-board ratings are not that closely coupled. Conisder Taylor Kingston... at one point one of the top 50 USCF CC players, and yet his OTB rating never exceeded 1853. There are also many known cases on chess.com of players who are rated much lower OTB than they are here, and vice-versa.

I have checked  a few of the names of top Facebook players and have seen a discrepancy. There is FIDE 2200 ranked player who has a Facebook rating of about 1600 a drop from 1900 after playing a few other high ranked Facebook players who have no FIDE rating. This would mean that some of the top Faccebook players are playing like IMs or GMs-- or they are cheating. I recently drew againt a top 50 player by forcing stalemate. The same player was  accused of using a Computer... this is a possibility.
I used to play tournament chess  and have played a few GMs and once drew against one of them.

Sorry for my ignorance, but what exactly is facebook ?

It is annoying to have played against a person who has the help of a computer...

And there are some indicators of such, like back on [edit] another site [/edit], when I was playing this one match, my opponent made this absolutely bizzare move, and then another, and so on. And after I had effectively lost that match, I asked him afterwards if he could explain the moves he made in his game - naturally, he could not. And then he never spoke another word to me.

And this guy wasn't that good either (he had just prior to my match with him, lost to a much lower ranked opponent).

And I had watched some of his games before, too; so how he went from average to incredible seemed somewhat... odd.

Eventually, he was asked about it from other people. He then, abruptly resigned all 15 or so of his active games (even the ones he was winning in), and left the site.

Odd...

So, that is one way of identifying a cheater; being unable to explain the moves they made, as well as becoming incredibly talented within a 24-hour timespan.

And then there are the fools with multiple accounts that just play against themselves - it is the same kind of stupid, just in a different wrapper.