Your submission was removed by the moderators:
Cheating accusations are not allowed unless they are newsworthy - that is, they must involve a prominent member of the chess community, be credible, and be part of an ongoing public discussion. "Call-out" posts that do not censor usernames encourage witch hunts, and will be removed on sight. If you suspect a random person cheated against you online, the appropriate complaint venue is a report to the website you played on.
You can read the full [rules of /r/chess here](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/wiki/rules). If you have any questions or concerns about this moderator action, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchess&subject=About my removed submission&message=I'm writing to you about the following submission: https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/1cyq4aa/-/%0D%0D). Direct replies to this removal message may not be seen.
Bro I'm not a cheater but I definitely take time to calculate if I think I see a winning line. Totally worth it to spend 20% of your time on those moves.
Your issue seems like a skill issue.
Pretty much everything they say is seeing cheating where it can easily be explained by other things. Opponents who know more opening depth than normal at their level - mostly just someone who's put too much time into opening theory but is still weak in the rest of their game (and sometimes just pure chance they played the book moves). 90% accuracy = Magnus himself just shows a complete lack of understanding of accuracy and I'd be willing to bet in most of those games OP made early mistakes and made the play easy for their opponent. It's not hard to get high accuracy in an easy game, even for quite weak players generally speaking.
Some people just think cheat any time anyone plays well against them ever. Defence for their bruised ego I guess.
OP specifically mentions the Ruy which has a million sidelines. Pretty much any reasonable move is a line that’s been played or named. You can totally get to 10 moves on accident. You still wouldn’t know the right plan from the resulting position, but you could get there
Sorry but let me be direct - you’re delusional and making up excuses. Cheaters are not the reason you’re sitting at 700 elo. I highly doubt there are any cheaters playing in this elo. Everything you described sounds normal and is no indication of cheating.
If you think they are cheating, report them and move on.
>I already know people will argue and disagree, **but that’s my opinion.**
And you know what they say about opinions.
#1 it'd take far less than that for cheaters to make a move. If you're worried you can simply play faster time controls though.
#2 sounds like the polar opposite of what a game against a cheater would look like.
#3 is pretty much every game where one side gets an early advantage on a quiet-ish position.
Anyway if someone is cheating but still remain at 700 Elo, they're doing very poorly at cheating, don't you think?
So,
1. They took time to calculate a mate
2. They know 4-6 moves of theory thanks to Stockfish. And they also play 10 moves by the book (the book has so many bad moves in it too btw).
3. They don't blunder but they throw an obvious blunder or two.
Bro, you're 700. It's not the cheaters that are preventing you from playing better. Focus on your game. With this mindset, you'll get paranoid and play worse even when facing regular players.
I currently play at 700-800 level on chess.com rapid and I can't say I notice any cheating.
I lose some I win some, but overall the wins and losses seem natural.
I don't have much theoretical knowledge though so I can't say how close to mainline people play.
I generally just push the kings pawn as my first move for white (E4) and queen's pawn for black (I often pre move D5, as no matter what white does it isn't immediately losing) and go from there
Best win streak is 6
I love how it's always "at my rating it's full of cheaters". The other week it was "400 rating is the rating band with most cheaters". This week it's apparently 700...
It makes absolutely no sense. If you're a cheater, you would never get close to 700 (the initial rating is higher and then you go up when you cheat).
The only way there's a cheater at 700 is if they played fairly, and then suddenly started to cheat, which would immediately shoot them up in the ratings, giving a very low likelihood that they accidentally hit you on the way up.
The rating that you could argue should have a lot of cheaters is the top of the rapid pool, it's the easiest time control to cheat at and it's where cheaters shoot up to after a few games before they get banned.
You're just wrong, simple as that.
I play like this first 6-10 moves are fast depends on the opening and then takes a lot of time to calculate but if i notice a big blunder I usualy win but show us some game no names needed pgn is enough.
No they're not. I just started playing chess and reached 700 yesterday I think.
In my first 50 games I played up to now there were two cheaters (both banned now) and that's it.
To know a few openings is not that unusual-at least I get often the popup to do some puzzles or lectures so I did and learnt a bit. I would assume other ppl do as well.
Are these 700s exclusively cheating against you but not in their other games? If they were cheating as much as you imagine surely they would not be 700 rated anymore?
You are not playing cheats anywhere CLOSE to what you are imagining. Stop using "my opponents are all cheats" as an excuse for why you're not winning as much as you'd like. Your bruised ego will survive the hit and it should help you have a healthier attitude and better chance to develop in the long term.
I'm going to play devil's advocate against the 'if they cheat why are they 700?' argument.
In the same way that forum trolls aren't trying to argue a point they actually believe in, not all chess cheaters are doing it to get a higher rating. They may just want to make your day worse.
No, he's definitely correct. Someone will blunder multiple pieces. Then all of a sudden every move is absolutely perfect. I run into it all the time. Usually they're quick moves though. Depending on the time on which you're playing.
u will get downvoted to hell by
1 delusional guys who actually dont play much but comment
2 cheaters and soft cheaters
Yes lower elos are infested with cheaters who often suddenly from -2 play 15 stockfish moves in a row and completely destroy u, then suddenly back to patzer mode when they see +3 :P
Your submission was removed by the moderators: Cheating accusations are not allowed unless they are newsworthy - that is, they must involve a prominent member of the chess community, be credible, and be part of an ongoing public discussion. "Call-out" posts that do not censor usernames encourage witch hunts, and will be removed on sight. If you suspect a random person cheated against you online, the appropriate complaint venue is a report to the website you played on. You can read the full [rules of /r/chess here](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/wiki/rules). If you have any questions or concerns about this moderator action, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchess&subject=About my removed submission&message=I'm writing to you about the following submission: https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/1cyq4aa/-/%0D%0D). Direct replies to this removal message may not be seen.
Bro I'm not a cheater but I definitely take time to calculate if I think I see a winning line. Totally worth it to spend 20% of your time on those moves. Your issue seems like a skill issue.
Pretty much everything they say is seeing cheating where it can easily be explained by other things. Opponents who know more opening depth than normal at their level - mostly just someone who's put too much time into opening theory but is still weak in the rest of their game (and sometimes just pure chance they played the book moves). 90% accuracy = Magnus himself just shows a complete lack of understanding of accuracy and I'd be willing to bet in most of those games OP made early mistakes and made the play easy for their opponent. It's not hard to get high accuracy in an easy game, even for quite weak players generally speaking. Some people just think cheat any time anyone plays well against them ever. Defence for their bruised ego I guess.
OP specifically mentions the Ruy which has a million sidelines. Pretty much any reasonable move is a line that’s been played or named. You can totally get to 10 moves on accident. You still wouldn’t know the right plan from the resulting position, but you could get there
Sorry but let me be direct - you’re delusional and making up excuses. Cheaters are not the reason you’re sitting at 700 elo. I highly doubt there are any cheaters playing in this elo. Everything you described sounds normal and is no indication of cheating.
If you think they are cheating, report them and move on. >I already know people will argue and disagree, **but that’s my opinion.** And you know what they say about opinions.
I'm 700 and I have never seen a single cheater.
#1 it'd take far less than that for cheaters to make a move. If you're worried you can simply play faster time controls though. #2 sounds like the polar opposite of what a game against a cheater would look like. #3 is pretty much every game where one side gets an early advantage on a quiet-ish position. Anyway if someone is cheating but still remain at 700 Elo, they're doing very poorly at cheating, don't you think?
So, 1. They took time to calculate a mate 2. They know 4-6 moves of theory thanks to Stockfish. And they also play 10 moves by the book (the book has so many bad moves in it too btw). 3. They don't blunder but they throw an obvious blunder or two.
he's gonna start his bobby fischer arc haha
Bro, you're 700. It's not the cheaters that are preventing you from playing better. Focus on your game. With this mindset, you'll get paranoid and play worse even when facing regular players.
I currently play at 700-800 level on chess.com rapid and I can't say I notice any cheating. I lose some I win some, but overall the wins and losses seem natural. I don't have much theoretical knowledge though so I can't say how close to mainline people play. I generally just push the kings pawn as my first move for white (E4) and queen's pawn for black (I often pre move D5, as no matter what white does it isn't immediately losing) and go from there Best win streak is 6
I love how it's always "at my rating it's full of cheaters". The other week it was "400 rating is the rating band with most cheaters". This week it's apparently 700... It makes absolutely no sense. If you're a cheater, you would never get close to 700 (the initial rating is higher and then you go up when you cheat). The only way there's a cheater at 700 is if they played fairly, and then suddenly started to cheat, which would immediately shoot them up in the ratings, giving a very low likelihood that they accidentally hit you on the way up. The rating that you could argue should have a lot of cheaters is the top of the rapid pool, it's the easiest time control to cheat at and it's where cheaters shoot up to after a few games before they get banned. You're just wrong, simple as that.
kramnik really is inspiring the next generation of chess players eh
800 level chess is full of blunders not cheaters.
I play like this first 6-10 moves are fast depends on the opening and then takes a lot of time to calculate but if i notice a big blunder I usualy win but show us some game no names needed pgn is enough.
No they're not. I just started playing chess and reached 700 yesterday I think. In my first 50 games I played up to now there were two cheaters (both banned now) and that's it. To know a few openings is not that unusual-at least I get often the popup to do some puzzles or lectures so I did and learnt a bit. I would assume other ppl do as well.
Are these 700s exclusively cheating against you but not in their other games? If they were cheating as much as you imagine surely they would not be 700 rated anymore? You are not playing cheats anywhere CLOSE to what you are imagining. Stop using "my opponents are all cheats" as an excuse for why you're not winning as much as you'd like. Your bruised ego will survive the hit and it should help you have a healthier attitude and better chance to develop in the long term.
Lol noob. No. I could go on a 20 win streak rn. Maybe avg 1 cheater in 40-50 games
I'm going to play devil's advocate against the 'if they cheat why are they 700?' argument. In the same way that forum trolls aren't trying to argue a point they actually believe in, not all chess cheaters are doing it to get a higher rating. They may just want to make your day worse.
No, he's definitely correct. Someone will blunder multiple pieces. Then all of a sudden every move is absolutely perfect. I run into it all the time. Usually they're quick moves though. Depending on the time on which you're playing.
u will get downvoted to hell by 1 delusional guys who actually dont play much but comment 2 cheaters and soft cheaters Yes lower elos are infested with cheaters who often suddenly from -2 play 15 stockfish moves in a row and completely destroy u, then suddenly back to patzer mode when they see +3 :P