@Mathmagician No, it shows that he's pretending to think in a position where it should be automatic at his supposed skill level
Everyone has good games. If every NM complained when they got beaten by a non-master there would be dozens of threads like this. I know someone who drew vs Lance and they're ~1500. The rating gap was small here, with the NM actually being lower rating. Are there any other games where he's this accurate?
EDIT: and the NM berserked
EDIT: and the NM berserked
The video proves nothing. We can't see you. You could very easily be using a tablet or smartphone with an engine app. I can tell by the way you act while playing, you're not even thinking about the game. That's probably because you're fiddling with your engine app. I didn't watch these bullet games mentioned in an earlier comment but if you are indeed an 1100 bullet player on Icc, that's just more proof you cheated here. Everything about you screams engine user to me.
How often does Lichess actually mistakes someone innocent as a cheater? It seems that it is not very rare.
EDIT: I'm not saying its a bad system, I just wish that we could see some numbers on how accurate this cheater detection system actually is.
EDIT: I'm not saying its a bad system, I just wish that we could see some numbers on how accurate this cheater detection system actually is.
i have reviewed your case.
before i get on with it, i should clear up a few things. i was not the one responsible for your "computer assistance" mark, and appeals should be sent to contact@lichess.org.
this public reply is something extraordinary.
some cheating patterns and very high engine correlation rates were detected in a number of your recent games. similar patterns were found in your other account @MeWantCookie.
i am not going to go into detail in public for obvious reasons but, as an example, in the "NM game", over 90% of your 43 moves were engine top 2 choices. of course, as unlikely as it is, it's not entirely implausible that one such game may happen by some combination of preparation, skill and luck, but that wasn't the only game.
i should also stress that we have access to more metrics which were deemed suspicious, and your game against the National Master was not the only reason for your mark. he was also not the one to report you to the moderators.
regarding the stream video, as others have already said, it doesn't include reasonable proof that these moves were played under normal circumstances.
so, i have found the defense to not be strong enough to overturn the evidence. the mark remains.
before i get on with it, i should clear up a few things. i was not the one responsible for your "computer assistance" mark, and appeals should be sent to contact@lichess.org.
this public reply is something extraordinary.
some cheating patterns and very high engine correlation rates were detected in a number of your recent games. similar patterns were found in your other account @MeWantCookie.
i am not going to go into detail in public for obvious reasons but, as an example, in the "NM game", over 90% of your 43 moves were engine top 2 choices. of course, as unlikely as it is, it's not entirely implausible that one such game may happen by some combination of preparation, skill and luck, but that wasn't the only game.
i should also stress that we have access to more metrics which were deemed suspicious, and your game against the National Master was not the only reason for your mark. he was also not the one to report you to the moderators.
regarding the stream video, as others have already said, it doesn't include reasonable proof that these moves were played under normal circumstances.
so, i have found the defense to not be strong enough to overturn the evidence. the mark remains.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.