Go back
Undetecable cheating :o

Undetecable cheating :o

Only Chess

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Varenka
But how often will these brillancies occur? I think they will be rare enough that they won't increase the match ups hugely. So the cheat could just play the brillancy anyway.
Perhaps... if cheat detection relied only on match-ups.

Besides, even at the top level, with a blunder check of 1 pawn, +-20% of moves would have only one "blunder-free" candidate, +-30% would have only 2 "blunder-free" candidates and +-40% would have only 3 "blunder-free" candidates. So the potential for influencing match-up stats is still quite significant.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
Perhaps... if cheat detection relied only on match-ups.

Besides, even at the top level, with a blunder check of 1 pawn, +-20% of moves would have only one "blunder-free" candidate, +-30% would have only 2 "blunder-free" candidates and +-40% would have only 3 "blunder-free" candidates. So the potential for influencing match-up stats is still quite significant.
Ok, but sometimes a "blunder free candidate" is an obscure brilliancy, and sometimes it's an obvious forced move. We'd need to distinguish between these, which makes automation harder.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Can someone get these teenagers a chess book or something? Perhaps some toys to play with would be preferable to timewasting in these kind of threads?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Jie
Can someone get these teenagers a chess book or something? Perhaps some toys to play with would be preferable to timewasting in these kind of threads?
Thank you for your brilliant remark.

I am happy to see that it is not easy to cheat without a big risk of being detected.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Ponderable
Thank you for your brilliant remark.

I am happy to see that it is not easy to cheat without a big risk of being detected.
That is obvious, that is why the 1200 guy who came asking how to look for cheats looked a bit foolish.

Vote Up
Vote Down

In fact for me cheating as such is not relevant since I am a too weak player anyway. But it still angers me when people do it.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
or heaven forbid... the comfy chair!
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.... we have 2, no 3 elements of .....

Vote Up
Vote Down

I think the OP was more thinking of Fritz' coach function instead of blunderchecking.As far as I know it only warns you when you missed your opponent's threat,not when you miss an attacking combination.But I seem incapable of creating threats against Fritz,so I'm not sure about this.
It would probably not even be enough to propel you over 2000 rate here anyway.

Vote Up
Vote Down

The proposed method is called blunder checking. It is the oldest form of computer cheating, and is no longer banned (because of the difficulties of enforcing) by some of the leading correspondence chess organizations. Some of the suspected cheats here almost certainly use this method.

It is likely that anyone using this technique at RHP eventually will be discovered and banned.

Why not just try to find the moves on your own, calculate the variations, then use your engine to conduct or assist in conducting the postmortem? That way chess continues to be an enjoyable game that you continue to become better at well into the age of senility.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.