2 edits
Staff introduced a new detection system for engine use in early August. Many of the lower rateds were banned for cheating in Live Blitz, where a member can be banned for engine use only after a single game (God knows how...).
A few seem to be banned for multi-accounting & some are regenerated banned cheats, but the vast majority of the 700+ were banned for engine use, according to staff.
www.chess.com/cheating.html
Originally posted by ZygalskiNew system? Now that is worrying if they carried out the same level of testing that governments and other large organisations routinely apply to new systems. If that is the case we may well be seeing the members being used as unwitting beta (or even alpha) testers.
Staff introduced a new detection system for engine use in early August. Many of the lower rateds were banned for cheating in Live Blitz, where a member can be banned for engine use only after a single game (God knows how...).
A few seem to be banned for multi-accounting & some are regenerated banned cheats, but the vast majority of the 700+ were banned for engine use, according to staff.
www.chess.com/cheating.html
It's certainly not in the site owner's best interests to ban several hundred possibly innocent formerly paying members. Apparently those banned under the new system are only the most blatant cheats.
A different system is used in Live Blitz, where no outside help at all is allowed.
Originally posted by ZygalskiIf those are the most blatant cheats why have a significant number been on the site blatantly cheating since 2007 or 2008? That suggests that either the previous system didn't catch even the blatant cheats, begging the question just what it did catch, or the new system has some unsuspected flaw. Either way, something isn't right. Not that I shall worry unduly, I don't play there at all, I just observe the antics from the sidelines.
It's certainly not in the site owner's best interests to ban several hundred possibly innocent formerly paying members. Apparently those banned under the new system are only the most blatant cheats.
A different system is used in Live Blitz, where no outside help at all is allowed.
- Joined
- 02 Aug 11
- Moves
- 2776
They are still banning en masse. I expect this number to rise further.
Just a guess here, but could it be that this new magical detection system that they are using is somehow flawed and generates a lot of false positives ?
Compound to that their missplaced and complete trust to said system?
Maybe this explains in part the large number. Because I doubt systemic and chronic cheating practices on chess.com
Just a thought.
2 edits
Originally posted by DiophantusI asked a strong club player why he didn't play online CC and he said "the internet is full of cheats. I can play against Rybka at home."
If those are the most blatant cheats why have a significant number been on the site blatantly cheating since 2007 or 2008? That suggests that either the previous system didn't catch even the blatant cheats, begging the question just what it did catch, or the new system has some unsuspected flaw. Either way, something isn't right. Not that I shall worry unduly, I don't play there at all, I just observe the antics from the sidelines.
The actions at chess.com seem to support the claims of widespread naughtiness when people play chess whilst seperated by an internet connection.
Still, nice to know there are hardly any engine users here! 🙂
I say once again, I very much doubt that the owner of chess.com wants to ban innocent paying members. Can you think of a reason why he'd do that?
All I can think is that the previous method was only used to boot idiotic cheats, whereas the new system clearly casts the net far wider.
The owner said that those banned are playing far more engine-like chess than the best legitimate CC & OTB players. Many of the long-term members recently banned have been analysed by myself & others & found to be blatant cheats.
'About time' & 'long overdue' are 2 phrases that spring to mind with regard to this issue.
Originally posted by ZygalskiNot wanting to ban innocent paying members is one thing, making sure the new system gets sufficient testing to ensure that it doesn't do that and does catch cheats is another. After all, if you invest time and presumably money in a fancy new doohickey, refusing to use it is probably not an option.
I asked a strong club player why he didn't play online CC and he said "the internet is full of cheats. I can play against Rybka at home."
The actions at chess.com seem to support the claims of widespread naughtiness when people play chess whilst seperated by an internet connection.
Still, nice to know there are hardly any engine users here! 🙂
I say ...[text shortened]... bout time' & 'long overdue' are 2 phrases that spring to mind with regard to this issue.
I have suspected for a while that the system in place up until August this year was not working correctly. On that basis, I'll go with "it's the previous system that was bust and the new one catches those the previous system should have caught". Even so, I'll not be rushing to play there again until someone devises a way to measure the testosterone levels of internet teens and then gags those found to have a level above a certain threshold.
Originally posted by vzografosOne thing is for sure, the number will not go down. I have yet to see a case where someone banned was reinstated on any site. To do so would require that the site admins admit "the system" is not perfect and that is not going to happen. So you can comfort yourself by believing the official "the system is perfect" line or worry about an imperfect system.
They are still banning en masse. I expect this number to rise further.
Just a guess here, but could it be that this new magical detection system that they are using is somehow flawed and generates a lot of false positives ?
Compound to that their missplaced and complete trust to said system?
Maybe this explains in part the large number. Because I doubt systemic and chronic cheating practices on chess.com
Just a thought.
My own take on it is that any system is imperfect and that worrying about false positives on an internet chess site will not prolong my life one iota. Life is too short and the internet too full of chess sites for me to worry about such things.