Analysis board "cheat detected"

No, I mean the automatic forfeit. If there is indeed cheating, it would be obvious from a post game analysis and the rating points would be refunded, while innocent but curious people would not be unduly penalized.

Perhaps it would be an improvement to hide the engine switch when analyzing a correspondence game in progress. Dunno whether that would make the code significantly more complex, however.

I think the issue is when you open another tab (as was proposed by somebody else before).

If you were analyzing a line that didn't occur, but it was very similar to the real game, then wouldn't it be reasonable for the cheap monitoring system to suppose you were trying to cheap covertly? I would imagine that the system detects based on similarity of the line you are analyzing and the game currently being played. Lichess has to keep people from cheating. You may have been caught in the crossfire here; however, I would rather have a sensitive anti-cheat system than one that can be easily tricked to provide assistance to cheaters.

That main difference was that, in the line I was analyzing, black wasn't down a bishop (10. Qa4+ Nc6□ instead of 10...Bd7?? 11. Qxb4 +- as played).

Correspondence online games with engine use banned don't make sense anyway. I'm confident in the cheat detection algorithm when playing bullet or blitz, but at correspondence TC engine help can be used in a "believable" way.

There would be no point in having correspondence games if every time you played someone they used an engine.

My point is that I would never play correspondence here because I could never be confident that my opponent isn't using an engine.

Classical correspondence chess without engines has died for this reason. Engine use is the standard in current ICCF competitions.

In correspondence games, you're supposed to click the little analysis board symbol on the *same* page as your game - this is the one that contains the opening book but *not* engine or endgame tablebase.

If you're clicking through to the normal analysis board via the Tools menu, then you're doing it wrong.

When people say you're allowed to use the analysis board in correspondence, they mean that you are allowed to click the analysis button next to the board itself.

@RandomCanadian, does that make sense? Next time you play a correspondence game, pay very careful attention to what buttons there are next to your board but do not navigate the top main menu.

So here is a related question, since this just happened to me as well:

Am I not allowed to use an engine to study openings/variations if I have a correspondence game going that used the same opening?

For example, I'm currently studying the Slav and have been for a week or so, and quite often use the opening explorer and the engine to analyze games and variations. In a recent correspondence game I got into the mainline Slav. The game was on move 26 and was roughly 10 or so moves out of any game in the database.

At what point is using an engine on an analysis board considered cheating? Move 12 was still in the table base. Can I look at move 12 with an engine? What about move 3 or 6? Or am I just no longer allowed to use an engine to study the Slav while this game is ongoing?

Obviously I crossed the line and I accept the loss for cheat detection (though for the record I will say that I NEVER used the engine to help me come up with any moves or ideas in the game), I just want to make sure I don't run into this situation again.