Explain how every game is 90+ accuracy for him. Explain how he has laughable bullet rating. Explain his insane winrate. Explain how he has beaten a BANNED and confirmed CHEATER?
@Puzzleandlearning said in #33:
> Explain how every game is 90+ accuracy for him. Explain how he has laughable bullet rating. Explain his insane winrate. Explain how he has beaten a BANNED and confirmed CHEATER?
Then explain why he hasnt been banned.
> Explain how every game is 90+ accuracy for him. Explain how he has laughable bullet rating. Explain his insane winrate. Explain how he has beaten a BANNED and confirmed CHEATER?
Then explain why he hasnt been banned.
@Autofill said in #34:
> Then explain why he hasnt been banned.
That's exactly what I want to know too.
> Then explain why he hasnt been banned.
That's exactly what I want to know too.
It's only dead to you if you believe that it's dead to you because of cheaters. Try and see the good in the majority of players who aren't cheating, is my advice xxx
@justme23 said in #37:
> Well if you played a "Banned" cheater that you must have cheated!
Then why are they not banned?
> Well if you played a "Banned" cheater that you must have cheated!
Then why are they not banned?
@Onyx_Chess said in #10:
> 1. Don't listen to people who want to promote the narrative that "cheating in chess is rampant and out of control".
> Most of them don't understand how much damage these kinds of posts produce, and many of them have given themselves reasons to be hyper-alert and believe that "cheaters are everywhere".
>
> 2. For years, Lichess would often interrupt the kinds of threads, where OPs would complain about cheating, by exposing how many people the OP was responsible for successfully reporting. I think that one of them, once, successfully reported one person. All of the many many others failed to report any suspicious accounts. This fact tells us all that we need to know about the people who beat this drum the loudest.
>
> 3. Depending on who you ask and when the research and testing was done, the amount of cheaters at lichess.org are somewhere around 1%-3% in the classical time controls with ratings of >2000; however, that number seems to jump at the lower the ratings and at shorter time controls. Depending who you ask, cheating at chesscom is much higher to the tune of 5%-8%.
>
> This is because everything that Lichess does is motivated out of "What's best for the chess community?" and they were actively trying to nullify cheating long before chesscom realized that they should appear to care about cheaters if they're to maximize profits.
>
> There is substantial and substantiated empirical evidence that chesscom:
> a) suspends/investigates/bans accounts that aren't actually cheating
> b) allows actual cheaters to cheat (this was already verified long before the latest debacle)
>
> Also, when chesscom announced that "We have the best anti-cheat on the planet," cheaters, everywhere, turned their hats on backwards and said, "OK. Game on. I'll never break 2000, but I can see myself having fun taking on 'the best anti-cheat in the world'.
>
> So, all-in-all, Lichess has set themselves up to be the best cheat-free experience.
>
> 4. The best advice surrounding the matter of people using silicon assistance is found here:
>
> www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1Wiok4H1RY
Very true, indeed. Plus, there are strategies to catch cheaters. For example, if their accuracy is like, 98 or 99 on a daily basis, then you can probably tell that they are cheaters. Another strategy is to check a win streak. If they are winning lots of games, they are probably cheating. If they have a higher rating, let's say 1700-1800+, then you can also tell.
Another thing is that you can tell the difference between a human move and engine move, and LiChess is great at catching those "silicon assistance".
> 1. Don't listen to people who want to promote the narrative that "cheating in chess is rampant and out of control".
> Most of them don't understand how much damage these kinds of posts produce, and many of them have given themselves reasons to be hyper-alert and believe that "cheaters are everywhere".
>
> 2. For years, Lichess would often interrupt the kinds of threads, where OPs would complain about cheating, by exposing how many people the OP was responsible for successfully reporting. I think that one of them, once, successfully reported one person. All of the many many others failed to report any suspicious accounts. This fact tells us all that we need to know about the people who beat this drum the loudest.
>
> 3. Depending on who you ask and when the research and testing was done, the amount of cheaters at lichess.org are somewhere around 1%-3% in the classical time controls with ratings of >2000; however, that number seems to jump at the lower the ratings and at shorter time controls. Depending who you ask, cheating at chesscom is much higher to the tune of 5%-8%.
>
> This is because everything that Lichess does is motivated out of "What's best for the chess community?" and they were actively trying to nullify cheating long before chesscom realized that they should appear to care about cheaters if they're to maximize profits.
>
> There is substantial and substantiated empirical evidence that chesscom:
> a) suspends/investigates/bans accounts that aren't actually cheating
> b) allows actual cheaters to cheat (this was already verified long before the latest debacle)
>
> Also, when chesscom announced that "We have the best anti-cheat on the planet," cheaters, everywhere, turned their hats on backwards and said, "OK. Game on. I'll never break 2000, but I can see myself having fun taking on 'the best anti-cheat in the world'.
>
> So, all-in-all, Lichess has set themselves up to be the best cheat-free experience.
>
> 4. The best advice surrounding the matter of people using silicon assistance is found here:
>
> www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1Wiok4H1RY
Very true, indeed. Plus, there are strategies to catch cheaters. For example, if their accuracy is like, 98 or 99 on a daily basis, then you can probably tell that they are cheaters. Another strategy is to check a win streak. If they are winning lots of games, they are probably cheating. If they have a higher rating, let's say 1700-1800+, then you can also tell.
Another thing is that you can tell the difference between a human move and engine move, and LiChess is great at catching those "silicon assistance".
Yes. Most of the people who play now are bots.
@Puzzleandlearning said in #25:
> "I saw somebody stealing in the shop and I then started stealing myself instead of reporting it to the police"
> Thats very good logic
Except it's not what you are doing. What you are doing is calling someone a thief because they don't have a basket.
> "I saw somebody stealing in the shop and I then started stealing myself instead of reporting it to the police"
> Thats very good logic
Except it's not what you are doing. What you are doing is calling someone a thief because they don't have a basket.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.