cheating paranoia

@TacticalPanzer so what is your suggestion exactly ?

Lichess policy and set rules are really annoying. I play on my phone in my spare time and sometimes I have to leave the game quickly. I get banned immediately. I think it's nothing. The opponent will just find someone else. It's not a world championship or a competition. It's nothing.

@kvakalalos in that case you can just resign the game, when you have to leave

I think there is overreacting on such subject and that cheating is a much smaller problem than some people think. Cheat detection systems seem effective,, and from my own experience of over 70,000 games, mostly played in tournaments, I can confirm that it's very rare to play against a cheater. And that Lichess has always taken appropriate action quickly.

@CSKA_Moscou said in #24:

I think there is overreacting on such subject and that cheating is a much smaller problem than some people think. Cheat detection systems seem effective,, and from my own experience of over 70,000 games, mostly played in tournaments, I can confirm that it's very rare to play against a cheater. And that Lichess has always taken appropriate action quickly.

You have played over 70k games, mostly OTB? Take a break, go see the birds and stuff. The way this kind of topics develop are always the same. Everyone claims to be an expert, proofs are not proof, and everyone is brave on the keyboards. Fabi Caruana has more experience than you? If you carry an opening book besides your computer, that goes detected? If you look at a computer for a single position that goes detected? Of course not. How often it happens is a different issue. Fabi playing a speedrun met a lot of cheaters. You can see him talking about that at reddit : "Fabiano Caruana calls out delusional Redditors who demand 100% proof for cheaters"

Which is a better opinion, yours or fabi? Or So, or Kramnik? I will go with Fabi. The important thing is this: one way or the other let the people express their informed opinions without censorship. That is a way to go. Well beyond chess is the way to go. Nothing further to add, and of course I will not reply any other comment, since in a forum as well as in twitter the one who wins is the one with most time to spend, not the one who is right. By the way, why dont you go to a different site and try interpolating engine moves now and then and opening helps notes next to you and see how detected you get? That would be a step towards proving something. You can inform us later of the results. Greetings in advance to every opinionated heavy poster!

@TacticalPanzer said in #25:

The important thing is this: one way or the other let the people express their informed opinions without censorship. That is a way to go.
<apologies for snipping a lot>

Informed opinion gets a large measure of respect where I come from. Informed opinion that is supported by credible evidence even more. Unfortunately, that is extremely rare; whereas uninformed opinion seems to be the rule.

@CSKA_Moscou said in #24:

Cheat detection systems seem effective,, and from my own experience of over 70,000 games, mostly played in tournaments
@TacticalPanzer said in #25:
You have played over 70k games, mostly OTB?
Comment #24 doesn't say anything about OTB. On the contrary, the context indicates "tournaments" means online tournaments in this sentence (which is mostly means arena style tournaments in online chess environment).

@TacticalPanzer

1. Dont appeal to colossuschess'es rating for the second time in this thread.

2. "Well, how that fits with "LIbre" ¿?..." if you want libre, go to facebook or twitter and then feel free to post what you want. This forums is for chess discussion, endless cheating accusations are annoying as deemed to be in the best interest of the majority players of lichess. Theres many GMs in the world, all with differing opinions and just because one of them says something doesn't mean its to be worshipped. The very GMs you mentioned, did not exagerrate cheating to the point that a lot here believe its influence to be.

3. "By the end of the day, cheating online is a hard thing to prove, to test, or to discover..." Yes. thats exactly the point. Again, its innocent till proven guilty not the other way around, is it?

4. "naive to dismiss cheating as a possibility..." yes it is, theres possibilities of everything. THeres a possibility that I am the secretly the ceo of lichess. But its unlikelier than likely, is it not?

5. "Which is a better opinion, yours or fabi? Or So, or Kramnik? I will go with Fabi.." you might need a crash course on debate logistics, Again, stop appealing to rating. You can be the best chess player in the world and be wrong about a topic and be the worst chess player in the world and be right about something,

6. "You have played over 70k games, mostly OTB? Take a break, go see the birds and stuff..." at this point, you are being toxic. Chess is a perfectly wholesome hobby and commenter seems to have been playing for a long time. You're hating on someone because they're more dedicated to chess than you? how does that work. If it is your reasoning, go tell the same words to the very GMs you so idolize.

I want to bring up a subsidiary point -

if your opponent, say, is cheating. Using help from a book or one engine move per one critical position. For example scenario - their real ratomg os 900 but they inconsistently cheat, whilst losing games on purpose to maintain a steady rating of 1700 - what would be the difference between them, and a real 1700 opponenet?

If they are by fact, undetectable, what practical difference do they make to you opposed to a real, fair, opponent. If you can't find the critical abnormality in their play, how can they alter your chess experience?

@discoooooord said in #29:

if your opponent, say, is cheating. Using help from a book or one engine move per one critical position. For example scenario - their real ratomg os 900 but they inconsistently cheat, whilst losing games on purpose to maintain a steady rating of 1700 - what would be the difference between them, and a real 1700 opponenet?

If they are by fact, undetectable, what practical difference do they make to you opposed to a real, fair, opponent. If you can't find the critical abnormality in their play, how can they alter your chess experience?

Actually the inconsistent cheating is worse than a consistent cheater in my opinion. Since here they're not only cheating but also sandbagging. So for example when playing that 1700 then half the time they'll be playing at 2500 strength with cheating and other half the time they'll be 900 without cheating that leads to an average of 1700. So this wouldn't give a good experience as when thinking you're facing a 1700 player you either face a GM level opponent or a novice.

However I think point you tried to make is whether you'd notice a difference between someone who memorised an opening book/theory and someone who cheats by using an opening book/database during a game. In that case there would be little to no difference apart from an honest player might occasionally forget or misremember theory while cheater might misread their source. If someone uses an engine it would essentially mean their tactical skill corresponds to one of a much higher rated player.

Probably worst experience for a player is to find your opponent blundered their queen and all of a sudden they panic and substitute LeelaQueenOdds leading to them miraculously winning. Although that phenomenon is no different to asking a GM friend to take over when you're losing. In these cases it's inconsistent cheating that is issue since they're honest part of the time and dishonest rest of the time where it's unclear if opponent will be 100% or 0% fair that means any rating points won or lost doesn't depend on your play but on how much your opponent cheats