22 Apr 04
1 edit
I will be tired to try to catch the cheaters in my 50 games. Why we couldn't let computer figure out the cheaters. If the server will find somebody who uses chess software he can stamp the nick with some words like "He uses the chess software to play".
Is it good idea? And the main quiestion is: Is it possible to implement the solution on this server?
22 Apr 04
Originally posted by sergen1976How does the sofware work? If I have a chess program running on my computer.... or If my moves are "computer like"?
I will be tired to try to catch the cheaters in my 50 games. Why we couldn't let computer figure out the cheaters. If the server will find somebody who uses chess software he can stamp the nick with some words like "He uses the chess software to play".
Is it good idea? And the main quiestion is: Is it possible to implement the solution on this server?
I have about 3 games right now that are computer games... I'd hate to get a tag just cuz I have software running...
Hows it work?
P-
22 Apr 04
There are 2 ways:
1) Interface will detect if chess software runs
2) The moves are "computer like".
Second is more usefull.
I understand than it is possible that the person can play like "computer chess". But the opponent will be glad to see in the profile that this chess player makes the 30% "computer like" moves.
22 Apr 04
Originally posted by sergen1976I don't think it will be possible to do this. Is a player a cheater if he plays a "perfect" game. I think mr. Tebb has played some. His moves could be the same as those from the computer, but that is because he is very good, not because he uses a computer. There are some threads in the forums about how you can see that someone maybe uses a computer, but it still won't be a proof. It is impossible, and without proof you can't make accusations. The best thing is that if you think someone is a cheater, just don't play him. That's the only thing you can do.
I will be tired to try to catch the cheaters in my 50 games. Why we couldn't let computer figure out the cheaters. If the server will find somebody who uses chess software he can stamp the nick with some words like "He uses the chess software to play".
Is it good idea? And the main quiestion is: Is it possible to implement the solution on this server?
22 Apr 04
Originally posted by sergen1976Enough already.
There are 2 ways:
1) Interface will detect if chess software runs
2) The moves are "computer like".
Second is more usefull.
I understand than it is possible that the person can play like "computer chess". But the opponent will be glad to see in the profile that this chess player makes the 30% "computer like" moves.
At what point will you STOP writing this continuously slanderous posts in the forum.
We do not want to hear about this from you.
22 Apr 04
2 edits
Originally posted by sergen1976This statement is absolutely absurd. If a GM played someone like you, with a rating of about 1600, he could easily be expected to win every single last one. Do you have any idea what these ratings mean? They relate the probability of a game between two players ending in a certain result. Broken down into plain English, this means that if two players with identical ratings play each other, they each have a 50% chance of winning. If there's a difference of 200 points, The higher rated player is expected to win 76% of the time. With a rating differnce of 800 points, the higher rated player is expected to win 99% of the time. Given that GM's have a rating of 2600 or higher, that puts even the weakest GM's in the world roughly 1000 points above you. So tell me, how is it not possible for a GM to beat you, let alone someone's "little sister" 100 out of 100 times?
[b]Edmont Dantes is cheater!
One master couldn't play 100 games with winning in every games. Even if he(she) is GM(master in our case). And even if all opponents will be "little sister" of somebody.
22 Apr 04
Originally posted by NaturalScienceWe can speak forever but I guess there's no way to convince this guy that Dantes is not a cheater,he simply continues denying the evidence.........
This statement is absolutely absurd. If a GM played someone like you, with a rating of about 1600, he could easily be expected to win every single last one. Do you have any idea what these ratings mean? They relate the probability of a game between two players ending in a desired result. Broken down into plain English, this means that if two pl ...[text shortened]... not possible for a GM to beat you, let alone someone's "little sister" 100 out of 100 times?
22 Apr 04
Originally posted by Exyi guess no one wants to play with sergen anymore so he has thrown teddy out of the pram and is going to throw a tantrum because he is bored......and who better to pick on....someone that is not here to fight back.
Why has this topic even come up for discussion? Dantes hasn't played a move on this site since March?!
22 Apr 04
Originally posted by ExyFrom what I have read, it is the behavior of players like Serge that drove Dantes to leave this site in the first place. So I suppose it's pretty relevant discussion. (Serge's behavior, that is, not whether or not Dantes is a cheater.)
Why has this topic even come up for discussion? Dantes hasn't played a move on this site since March?!
22 Apr 04
Originally posted by sergen1976Even if you had a valid reason to believe someone was cheating (which you still don't), both measures of your plan are impossible to inplement. How could the "interface", for instance, detect when someone is using chess software if the person is logged out of RHP? As for claiming that certain moves are "computer-like", well that will always be speculation and nothing more.
[b]There are 2 ways:
1) Interface will detect if chess software runs
2) The moves are "computer like".
22 Apr 04
Surely the moves would not be 'computer like' to class as cheater, because is a computer not programmed by humans anyway? If they brought in a thingy -ma-bob that crowned everyone that moves so called like a computer i would be one of many to leave this site, but not because of cheating, but because of the utter dis-trust it would show to it's members, i think that is a ridiculous suggestion.
Why are you so bothered about cheating serg? The only people i have ever seen kick up this much fuss about cheating when there is nothing majorly important is cheaters themselves.
I think you are ridiculous and you really need to get out more. it's just a game!
23 Apr 04
Originally posted by purclecowThis is true, however computers have no concept of planning. All they do is brute calculation. They don't play chess. They execute the functions that have been programmed with. I don't think there's a better example in history than Game 3 of Garry Kasparov's match with X3D Fritz backin November. The computer played itself straight into a position with no active play, and its defeat was inevitable. But since it couldn't calculate far enough ahead to see that it would eventually be checkmated, it had no sense that anything bad was happening. By the time it would realize it was in trouble, it would be tool ate. Its programmer resigned on its behalf before that could happen. Here's a link to that game:
[b]Surely the moves would not be 'computer like' to class as cheater, because is a computer not programmed by humans anyway?
http://x3dchess.com/news/analysis/kasparovx3dfritzall.htm
But, as far as offering "proof" that someone is cheating because their moves are "computer-like", you're right, it's just not possible. But that doesn't stop Serge, does it?
23 Apr 04
Originally posted by NaturalScience
From what I have read, it is the behavior of players like Serge that drove Dantes to leave this site in the first place. So I suppose it's pretty relevant discussion. (Serge's behavior, that is, not whether or not Dantes is a cheater.)
Rubbish!
The truth is that Edmond Dantes is in fact Santa Claus.
He came at christmas time and gave us the presents of his company and games.
Have at look at his profile: three Xmas tournaments 😉
Then he left and went back to the north pole to have his annual 10 month vacation.
If we are all good then i am sure he will be back for another round of presence next Xmas 🙂