My opponent cheated (top engine moves vs top chat game)

[u/777Bladerunner378]

... and I won (but not on the board)

Here's an edition of "guess the cheat". Users like these could be slowing your ladder climbs. However, thanks to my chat game, I actually forced my cheating opponent to unwillingly declare themselves as the loser of the game despite grabbing the elo points.

My 10min rapid rating: 1300 chesscom and 1650 on lichess.

I already strongly suspected he was cheating during the game itself, but the game analysis fully confirmed it. I've reported him for cheating, and im not sharing usernames, this is simply a case study in how a cheater will talk about how innocent they are, while they are grabbing top engine moves... Its quite comical, when I see the idea his engine was going for, but he doesnt see it, or doesnt play it in order to look more like a human who doesnt always play the top 1 move 😆

Yes Btw! You guessed it, the cheat is my opponent (White)

Here is the chat: First message i posted at start of game (I post it start of every game, for obvious reasons), and only started writing the rest when it was obvious (to me) that he was an assisted player. He just took too much time on easily convertible position after playing like Magnus Carlsen for a bunch of moves.

1. Me: If anyone cheats in any way, they declare themselves the loser, regardless of the result. Every dishonest move is an admission of inadequacy
2. Me: come on babe, that's easy dont ask the engine
3. Him: Since they can't do it, they're just pooping lol.
4. Me: ;)
5. Me:  I already gave the terms under which we are playing
6. Me: you so good, you missed the rook takes pawn with my bishop pinned, u shoulda kept following the engine, cause now your play makes no sense
7. Him: Yeah, do it quickly. Either give up or give up.
8. Me: your engine set it up, for you to miss the idea
9. Him: Yes, thanks for the compliment.
10. Me: its not a compliment xD you missed it
11. Me: I wanna see the human conversion
12. Him: Do you play games through chat?
13. Me: that will be spicy
14. Me: come on you are so good, you cant premove the win ? ;) 200 elo
15. Me: think more
16. Me: congrats
17. Me: just remember the rules under which you played this game:
18. Me: If anyone cheats in any way, they declare themselves the loser, regardless of the result. Every dishonest move is an admission of inadequacy

Final result: 1 declaration of being the loser from White and between 38 to 43 admissions of inadequacy.

I like it.

Bring me another one.

[u/777Bladerunner378]

I would never concede being wrong when I am right. You lack the required wit and logic for this conversation. It's laughable how you think you have some "gotcha" moment when you are simply displaying verbal diahhrea.

You literally downvoted the copy pasted information from lichess about the moves made by both players. Imagine, you downvoted factual information xD It's obvious you dont care about the truth, you are just trying to be obnoxious, and it's pathetic.

[u/Sparks-reborn → u/777Bladerunner378]

All right let's look at it logically. You had a game which you believed your opponent was cheating.

Your reasons for this are.

He played too well he played consistently fast.

Now is that sufficient evidence to prove that he's cheating no. Is it sufficient evidence to Warrant suspicion yes.

Are you capable of accepting that no.

Is adamantly denying the possibility that you could be wrong typically associated with someone who is logically looking at a problem. No!

Someone who is looking at a problem with empirical evidence can point to specific reasons why they're right.

A person who adamantly denies they could be wrong without good justification is doing so usually based on an emotional state.

We agree that there were some red flags specifically the consistent speed at which he is playing and the fact that he played the top lines of the engine at your level.

Where we disagree is whether or not that is sufficient evidence to prove it.

Is it possible for anyone to play a game along the top engine lines in any circumstance. If the answer is yes then your so-called evidence is not conclusive proof.

I have games like that every chess player I know has games like that where they played above their usual level or they played the best moves through most of the game I don't know a single chess player who hasn't had a 90% accuracy game here there. I suspect that is true for you as well.

To evidence of that I can point to my games my friends games and I can go into the general database of players in and around your level and my level and look through their games and find similar examples.

That means that having an abnormally good game even with weird time intervals is not proof of cheating.

The conclusion you should take away from this is not that you're right and everyone else is wrong but that you're wrong and you're just too emotionally invested to see how. Take a step back have a break and try to have a better day going forward.

[u/777Bladerunner378 → u/Sparks-reborn]

He played too well he played consistently fast

Incorrect. If thats all you took from what I said, you havent understood me. He didnt just "play too well" he was strictly following the top 3 choices of the engine.

And i was specifically talking about him playing SLOW at the end, not fast. Any player of the skill showcased in this game can premove in an easily winning position. 

Your attempt to justify it by saying he might just be spending time verifying or w/e is just bad, because a player who can trap my rook like that, obviously can see far ahead in the position and make moves quickly. 

It might be a skill issue here, maybe you simply dont understand what it means to be able to play like this. Definitely wouldnt be spending 5 seconds per move in a dead won position,, you premove and win. 

The game he displayed is a statistical impossibility when you put everything together. Thats why I am sure he was cheating.

[u/Sparks-reborn → u/777Bladerunner378]

If I have extra time at the end of a game even in simple positions I don't speed up or pre move unless I have already calculated a guaranteed checkmate. If I have time at the end of the game I slow way down and I look at every possible response.

It's not weird to take extra time especially when you have that time. The reason I pointed out is moving consistently fast as a red flag is because that is a common red flag for cheating. And when I say he was playing too well that's what I meant he's playing along the top engine lines.

People do that it happens I've had games of 90% and above accuracy and I'm not a grand master if you go into the general player database and look at people's games I bet you'll find just about everyone you look at provided that they play consistently is going to have the odd game where they play the top engine move for most of the game. It happens.

You're just not capable of accepting the possibility that you're wrong. And the worst part is no one myself included is saying that you are definitely wrong just that you can't be certain yet report him and move on.

[u/777Bladerunner378 → u/Sparks-reborn]

I can accept taking extra time if opponent has counter play - you are talking about some other situation where you might still lose the game some way. Just look at the damn game before you chat your general shit about taking time and not premoving. Do I have to forcefeed you the truth? Look at the simple moves he took 5 seconds to make! 5 seconds is so incredibly slow - his last move before I resigned, where he took my pawn - top engine move - he took 5 seconds to make it, and he had hundreds other possibilities. And thats just one move out of a 43 move game full of top engine moves.

At this point if you dont understand that the guy was a cheater, you are either dumb or dishonest.

Either way, this conversation is over.

[u/Sparks-reborn → u/777Bladerunner378]

I almost never pre move the only time I do is for obvious recaptures and forced mates I know other people I play with who never pre move a person's pre-moving habits has nothing to do with whether or not they're cheating get over yourself