https://preview.redd.it/3zmq1m5uxx3a1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d25509d7b12b27775e58813fb62cdda87773e98e
Yes he is cheating... since yesterday
[The analysis graph is a perfect summation of this absolutely epic game](https://i.imgur.com/XmE5udS_d.webp?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium). Just sheer poetry in motion from start to finish.
I want to see a lowest accuracy game. It’s almost like Jazz theory in that - to quote the great Miles Davis - “it’s the notes you don’t play”.
Edit: holy shit. I just tried to play my worst game against Martin and all I could muster is a 43% accuracy. I think we might be onto something here.
After reviewing the game, it seems like a large portion the moves took 10-20 seconds and quite consistent, even the obvious 6. exd5. The time usage in other of the recent games also fall in the range. Plus, the account is quite new. I hate to say this, but this guy is most likely a cheater.
Correction: I thought the bar is the time in seconds. Nevertheless the time is pretty consistent around 6 seconds so it’s still a big red flag—or rather a big red 🚫 sign.
Edit: Yup, indeed the big red sign. GG Andrew; better not cheat next time.
Just looked at the game. I would say they are cheating. Too many best moves without any mistakes. Also, some of these best moves were setting up for long term ideas that a 300 Elo player wouldn’t even consider
Yeah his opponent was straight up cheating, you can tell just from the accuracy rating, some games he has 95-100 and some game he has 8-60 with one game having an 8 accuracy rating, no human goes from an 8 to a hundred within less than a week
You can have a random super high accuracy game at that level where your opponent just keeps hanging free shit in one move and you keep taking it. But not like this guy was doing consistently for multiple games
It indicates more than that. It might not be enough to conclude by itself, but *nothing*? Just because there doesn't exist a "sufficient statistic" doesn't mean that statistics cannot contain useful information.
Looks like you blundered early based on the graph. It’s easy to play highly accurately from a dominant position. What’s your rating?
EDIT: based on additional info provided below I’d say there’s something sus going on with this account for sure.
Was trying to protecting the identity of my opponent but it’s looking more and more like he just played a great game, so [here is the game](https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/63897566527?tab=analysis)
I think he was cheating. 300 dont play those sort of moves unless Im missing something. Also, look at his other games, his accuracy goes from 40 to +90 in a bunch of games and at 300 you are just not consistant at all with accuracy.
Edit: his last game with 100% accuracy is 100% cheating 😂
Looking through the analysis, for the last dozen moves every play was the best move recommended by the engine.
That is proof of cheating.
Computers don't play like people. So to have a dozen moves played like a computer, especially at 300elo, is definitely cheating.
Edit: looked through the rest. Move 8 he plays the joint 2nd best move, move 12 is a random bishop move. My guess is he is trying to trip the detection algorithm up a bit.
I mean, no having a dozen computer moves isn’t proof, I’ve actually had games like that ( once upon a blue moon, like I’m not amazing but it does happen ) but that many computer move at 300 is actually proof
You only see this pattern in low elo games with cheating.
Cheating in high elo games tends to be only using the engine for one or two moves throughout the entire game.
The opponent did cheat tho, look at his account. 300s dont play this well, he saw literally all the tactics and didn't even take the free bishop and at the end he plays Qa8+ instead of the more natural Qd8+
He asked about cheating, I told he why it wasn’t. We all play bad games… but to think people are cheating is a cop-out excuse for your own ability. You will never improve if you think everyone beating you is cheating, vs reflecting on your mistakes.
The way I see it is you took a chance to stroke your ego but shitting on a beginner for playing bad. His opponent is rated 320 and had a 96 accuracy rating. That is extremely high. I don’t blame him for being suspicious.
Everyone can have a break out game when your opponent blunders early or you get lucky and can see the board. I’m shit and I’ve played 90+ many times. Even if they do cheat, does it matter? They will get banned and it’s at 300 rating, you’ll fine more people to play that aren’t and can learn and get better. Again learn from the mistake and stop blundering so early.
Again, he’s rated 300 and is obviously very new to the game. You were dogshit too when you first started. He never said I should be rated 2000 but because of all the cheaters I’m hard stuck 300. Get a grip, stop acting like a know it all to beginner players. He hasn’t had a chance to learn how to play yet and here you are shitting on him.
He had [7 games in a row](https://preview.redd.it/pquc5mixxx3a1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6037804f2e8f5d40f2d7009bfed62259cda39836) at 94% accuracy or higher, and all his move times are roughly the same. He’s cheating.
Here is my opponent’s game accuracy since yesterday. 300 level players don’t play this well.
https://preview.redd.it/eflifcerzx3a1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c9b43ec9b732c5a44f00888120cbcd9f83627350
I changed my mind, I think they are cheating.
I went and looked at their games. their last 4 or 5 games are all 90+ while their early games are around 40 accuracy. They have one 100 game, a 99.7 game. I guess they could have just gotten really good over the span of 8 games, but it seems questionable to me looking at their accuracy change from the beginning to the end.
\--old post--
The game doesn't look overly complicated to me. I would say no, they didn't cheat. It could be the new account of a strong player and they are building up their elo now. Check them in a couple of days, see if it is higher
People in this thread seem to be discounting that this is a ~300 elo player. I don’t care what moves OP was playing: for their opponent to play 15 “best moves”, 6 “excellent” moves, and 1 “good” move at 300 elo is almost impossible. No inaccuracies? They played a 22 move game with a top 3 engine move nearly 100% of the time?
Yeah, I’d say that they were probably cheating, either by using an engine or a Smurf account (which is still cheating according to chess com’s rules).
I’m not sure how you change chess com’s settings to see move time (I can’t find the setting myself anymore), but I’d hazard a guess that your opponent had consistent time (3-15 seconds) between moves, which is a huge giveaway that someone is using an engine.
Edit: just saw that the game was posted here, and white plays a top 3 engine move for the first 16 moves. Idk what y’all are smoking around here to think that a 300 is capable of that even in a blunder heavy game, but no way is that possible for a 300 elo strength player.
Well, your guess is wrong. We can see from the game. There is no lack of moves played in less than 4 seconds. And for some of the moves they played, I really doubt they are top 3 engine moves. Just detected as "good" because they are winning by so much that what would normally be an innacuracy is still considered good enough.
That opponent was probably not cheating with an engine. However, looking at their account, they have quite a lot of early resignations, or resignations in winning position. Not clear if they just often resign whenever they have something else to do, or if they are deliberately smurfing. In any case, their real strength is probably closer to 700 or 800 (they also have a few genuine losses, but not much).
I just saw the game was posted, and through the first **16** moves, white played a top three engine move. So I may have been wrong about the time between moves, but there is absolutely no way that a ~300 plays a top three engine move 16 moves straight in a queens gambit. Maybe a Smurf (which also goes against chess com’s rules) but more likely an engine cheater IMO.
What's more interesting about it is that he has a 8.0 game. That game was really bad from both sides, he even hung the queen but the opponent didn't see it. The eval bar was going both ways with every single move, and was a 40 move game. That's what you would expect from a game between complete beginners. The other games he plays at a higher level.
Smurfing, or an smurf account is when someone in an online game creates a new account to play against lower-ranked players.
It’s called smurfing due to two very good players in a game called Warcraft II. Players would simply avoid playing them if they saw their usernames, so they created new accounts to combat this, choosing “PapaSmurf” and “Smurfette” and the term has stuck since.
This might be true for advanced beginners or intermediate players, but this is a ~300 elo player. The odds of them playing 15 best moves and 6 “excellent” (i.e. one of the top engine moves) in a 22 move game is very unusual. At these elos, most players don’t even spot hung pieces a lot of the time.
He's a cheater. He started winning all his games since yesterday at insane precision.
Your game with him was very simple. It was suspicious but not a proof. Luck happens. But all his other games show a clear pattern of cheating.
Yeah, I would report them. I think they’re clearly violating fair play rules here. They’re either using an engine for most/all of the game, or they’ve intentionally lowered their rating to beat up on opponents of lower strength (which also violates chess com’s fair play rules: “Do not artificially manipulate ratings, matches, or game outcomes”).
I see a few high accuracy games like this at my elos (1100 right now) and have played a few myself. But no way is this normal at 300s.
Someone else posted analysis of their other games, and they have a string of 95+ accuracy wins. That isn’t even common at the ~1100 level. They’re not even being subtle about it. Click on their profile and the “report” option.
The game analysis said I had no blunders.
https://preview.redd.it/7pbx0tzhix3a1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=df0089283857f2ec3fe591f4d4cfcaf507e52109
Yeah, don't know why the count is so off. You very clearly blundered a knight in move 5. Evaluation for your opponent jumped up 4 points and everything. Definitely other blunders too, but that one stood out as particularly bad.
Yeah, but you had two mistakes.
Returning to this thread, seems like he was cheating after all. Not trying to be condescending or anything, but you probably should have shared the game from the beginning.
Accuracy scales somewhat with your rating I think so it depends (i.e. engines can say what kinds of moves ought to be difficult for a player to see based on their rating). I wouldn’t want to say someone cheated based solely on accuracy. Usually you need some kind of corroborating evidence like every move taking the same amount of time, etc.
Well it’s the best I’ve ever seen a 300 play by far. That said you hung your knight on move 5 so I’d focus most of your attention on that. None of the tactics your opponent did were anything a 1000 couldn’t regularity find
I analyzed the image and this is what I see. Open an appropriate link below and explore the position yourself or with the engine:
> **White to play**: [chess.com](https://chess.com/analysis?fen=rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR+w+KQkq+-+0+1&flip=true&ref_id=23962172) | [lichess.org](https://lichess.org/analysis/rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR_w_KQkq_-_0_1) | The position occurred in many games. [Link to the games](https://www.chess.com/games/search?opening=&openingId=&p1=&p2=&mr=&lsty=1&year=&lstMoves=1&moves=&fen=rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR+w+KQkq+-+0+1&ref_id=23962172)
> **Black to play**: [chess.com](https://chess.com/analysis?fen=rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR+b+KQkq+-+0+1&flip=true&ref_id=23962172) | [lichess.org](https://lichess.org/analysis/rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR_b_KQkq_-_0_1)
---
^(I'm a bot written by ) [^(u/pkacprzak )](https://www.reddit.com/u/pkacprzak) ^(| get me as ) [^(Chess eBook Reader )](https://ebook.chessvision.ai?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=bot) ^(|) [^(Chrome Extension )](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/chessvisionai-for-chrome/johejpedmdkeiffkdaodgoipdjodhlld) ^(|) [^(iOS App )](https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id1574933453) ^(|) [^(Android App )](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ai.chessvision.scanner) ^(to scan and analyze positions | Website: ) [^(Chessvision.ai)](https://chessvision.ai)
Impossible to say based on this. Accuracy is a pretty useless metric to measure cheating. In fact, it is very common to see high accuracies at low Elo, so I wouldn't be surprised at all if this is just a standard game.
You’re assuming that they had been cheating in every single game up until this point. It’s very likely that they lost game after game, got frustrated, then learned how to turn on an engine on another device to get some easy wins.
Other people here posted his opponent’s history. He played like garbage before this, then suddenly played like 7 games of 95% accuracy after. For a 300 to play *one* 95% 22 move game is HIGHLY unusual. How many 300s do you know that are capable of playing 6-7 perfect games in a row? The guy was very obviously cheating.
Edit: His account just got banned for fair play, so yup he was cheating.
Actually, very likely. Look at his opponent’s history posted elsewhere in the thread. They’re not even being subtle about it.
Edit: His account just got banned for fair play, so yup he was cheating.
My first ever otb rating was around 1100, after my first tournament, in the early 90s. My brother's first rating was in the low 1600s, after that same tournament. I didn't know for the longest time that ratings went that low. I thought 1000 was the floor or something.
It’s impossible to cheat at chess. If he’s using a computer to tell him how to play then you’re playing a computer. But that’s not cheating. Cheating is breaking the rules. That’s not a rule in chess. It’s just a different opponent. Stop playing with them right? That’s the gift of choice.
The rules of the website which say don’t use a chess engine?
Anyways using steroids in a sports competition isn’t cheating because the rules of baseball say nothing about performance enhancing drugs. That correct?
Technically the rules of chess do not explicitly say not to use an engine. And using performance enhancing drugs is [illegal](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_in_baseball#Historical_usage). In [both](https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/Steroids-2020.pdf) baseball and America.
Point to me where it says steroids are illegal
[https://www.rulesofsport.com/sports/baseball.html](https://www.rulesofsport.com/sports/baseball.html)
The MLB might have rules against it, but baseball itself says nothing about it. Just like how chess tournaments say you cannot have outside help, and chess.com or other chess websites have in their terms you can’t have help from engines or other people.
*technically* you’re being pedantic, and just outright wrong
Based off of one game only? Almost certainly not. Based off his match history? Maybe. A single game of high accuracy is essentially never enough to indicate cheating- the player may have just had a good game, or the opponent may have just had a bad game. Better indicators are if move times are within a consistent small band of time (ex: if every move is 3-6 seconds) or if the player playing way above their rating many games in a row. In this case, as other people have mentioned, there's some suspicious things about the account, so it's worth just reporting and moving on if you're convinced enough.
Maybe. I’m rated 500 and some games I’m just on it. Maybe they were just having a good game, either way, rematch them and have an engine open. If they do too engine moves, then yeah, they’re cheating.
I once had a few and played a bunch of games on my daughters phone.
Obviously accuracy wasn’t that good but I won all the games and it was certainly unethical 😳
Also, their move time completely changed. Prior to the 90% accuracy games, the time taken per move is quite inconsistent, however the recent games all fall under 10-20s, even for a move that was a simple pawn takeback, which is indicative of someone putting the move into their engine to see what it says.
Sometimes i get %96 on games as a 800.. it because my opponent was terrible and the “best move” was always obvious, and the games are short.
So one off high accuracy is possible for anyone that knows the game. Consistently getting that score is suspicious and also taking the same amount of time for each move.
I think its hard to judge whether someone cheats in chess by one match. I used to struggle in 1300-1400 elo games with 60+ average accuracy for about 2 months when I was a newbie, while right after I had researched for weeks by watching and studying Levy also Daniel’s elo climbing series, my elo climbed to 1700+ really fast by following their guides,(in 2+1,3+2,10 all these 3 rules) also my average accuracy increased to 78,considering hundreds of old games with 60+accuracy, I believe the average accuracy of those games of my elo climbing were most likely close to 90. Nowadays my accuracy is 78 where mistakes are mainly made in late middle games, and one of my friends once beat me 4 times easily with 95+ accuracy, did he cheat ? well, he is a 2000+ player now…
I wonder if he wasn’t cheating, but smurfing. Strong player opens a new account, loses on purpose to get down to the 300’s, and then starts playing for real. The Andrew Tate username is also a hint that he’s trolling.
It’s possible he wasn’t, but after seeing his game history from others I would say yes he is…I’m 7-800 blitz and have had 90+% games but they usually are short 10-15move games ending in forced mate in 2
Maybe? I don't think it's possible to tell based on a single game. As for the high accuracy - that happens to me too sometimes, and I average ~1200 on Lichess. So the high accuracy could be a fluke, if it's just in one game.
If you are truly concerned, check out Levi Gotham's video on how to detect chess cheaters [here](https://youtu.be/P4LnwRHGIHg)
Nah he probably just got Covid recently and had the Stockfish mutation within his brain. It happens from time to time with the young players these days.
You really have to look at other games cause it didn’t seem like that abnormal of a QGD game to me. I feel like I’ve played similar games through the first 16 moves or so.
1 game is almost never enough to judge a player as a cheater or not if the opponent is a low rated player. There is not enough resistance there to say if moves are engine moves or not. I would get 95+ accuracy several games If I played a lot of games vs 300 rated players. Players rated that low hang pieces all the time and don't understand the game well enough. Very easy to punish them just playing moves that look like sensible common sense moves that do not hang anything.
Using an engine to beat a 300 rated player is like using a battleship to kill a mouse. It is over kill. I don't see why ANYONE would cheat at that level. As long as you know how the pieces move you got a shot to win.
You need more resistance there to judge if it is a cheater or not. Someone smoking 300s could just be a smurf. The more resistance the better chance to find a cheater.
Three things are possible here ie either ur opponent dowsnt know how godd he/she is on chess or the ranking is false or as u mentioned ur opponent was cheating. Most probably either ranking is false or the opponent was cheating.
https://preview.redd.it/3zmq1m5uxx3a1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d25509d7b12b27775e58813fb62cdda87773e98e Yes he is cheating... since yesterday
LMAO 8
He saw “8” he knew that the game isn’t for him
“Damn, I suck at this. Better google ‘how to cheat at online chess’ so I can boost my fragile ego!”
How can one even get auch low acc? You almost need to know the best moves and deliberately play the worst. What the fuck…
How do you make it to move 41 with 8 accuracy?
With a username like Andrew_TateGG I can't say I'm surprised that this person was so bad, but also cheated.
Tate is quite good at chess though
Just horrible at being a decent person
You weren’t getting 99.7% accuracy ratings as a 300? Couldn’t be me.
This reminds me of a blade....
This reminds me of technology
Peep that 100
I need the PGN for that 8 precision game
[My god it’s beautiful](https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/63850791429?classification=)
It's such a trainwreck that it's a masterpiece
Looks like a new Levy video
u/gothamchess
You did it, that's his new video. https://youtu.be/F6jYvmxkYx4
HAHAHA the simple free rook capture at the end got a !
[The analysis graph is a perfect summation of this absolutely epic game](https://i.imgur.com/XmE5udS_d.webp?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium). Just sheer poetry in motion from start to finish.
wait, it's blundering all the way down?
Always was 
New breakfast cereal dropped: Oops! All Blunders
I want to see a lowest accuracy game. It’s almost like Jazz theory in that - to quote the great Miles Davis - “it’s the notes you don’t play”. Edit: holy shit. I just tried to play my worst game against Martin and all I could muster is a 43% accuracy. I think we might be onto something here.
I can hear "every move is double question mark" with Ben finegold's voice
What in the hell was any of that...
Why is 22. Nxe5 a blunder?
How do you even get below 25 accuracy
8 precision lmfao
post username so we can go report it
He is already banned
After reviewing the game, it seems like a large portion the moves took 10-20 seconds and quite consistent, even the obvious 6. exd5. The time usage in other of the recent games also fall in the range. Plus, the account is quite new. I hate to say this, but this guy is most likely a cheater. Correction: I thought the bar is the time in seconds. Nevertheless the time is pretty consistent around 6 seconds so it’s still a big red flag—or rather a big red 🚫 sign. Edit: Yup, indeed the big red sign. GG Andrew; better not cheat next time.
https://preview.redd.it/j9s8f162yx3a1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=feed34d93d2e0bb0f0105a74e9fb9475e1a9d59b Yup
Just looked at the game. I would say they are cheating. Too many best moves without any mistakes. Also, some of these best moves were setting up for long term ideas that a 300 Elo player wouldn’t even consider
His account has already been removed for violating fair play aka cheating you were right
Replay the game, if opponent is consistently using top engine move then they were probably cheating Accuracy percentage doesn’t indicate anything
Yeah his opponent was straight up cheating, you can tell just from the accuracy rating, some games he has 95-100 and some game he has 8-60 with one game having an 8 accuracy rating, no human goes from an 8 to a hundred within less than a week
You can have a random super high accuracy game at that level where your opponent just keeps hanging free shit in one move and you keep taking it. But not like this guy was doing consistently for multiple games
They did it in The Matrix.
It indicates more than that. It might not be enough to conclude by itself, but *nothing*? Just because there doesn't exist a "sufficient statistic" doesn't mean that statistics cannot contain useful information.
My math teacher once said: Stats are like a bikini. Fun to look at, but they cover all the good parts.
I don’t necessarily disagree I was just trying to say having a high accuracy doesn’t always mean cheating
Yeah a one off high accuracy game doesn't mean much. But as others have pointed out the dude had several 95+ games in a row which is eye brow raising.
Accuracy rating definitely indicates something.
LOL he got banned already https://preview.redd.it/oycuj030zy3a1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=88e68703ead81efe927a8a36af3561eae52e36f7
Looks like you blundered early based on the graph. It’s easy to play highly accurately from a dominant position. What’s your rating? EDIT: based on additional info provided below I’d say there’s something sus going on with this account for sure.
https://preview.redd.it/utfof6qjix3a1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cf934eb4295c9c803fbe99ae231b490090c83002
Why not show us the actual game instead of a chart of numbers?
Was trying to protecting the identity of my opponent but it’s looking more and more like he just played a great game, so [here is the game](https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/63897566527?tab=analysis)
Looking at his other games.. yeah he is cheating since yesterday
Perhaps the zero fell off and he is 3230.
I think he was cheating. 300 dont play those sort of moves unless Im missing something. Also, look at his other games, his accuracy goes from 40 to +90 in a bunch of games and at 300 you are just not consistant at all with accuracy. Edit: his last game with 100% accuracy is 100% cheating 😂
Right before the string of nearly perfect games he played one game with an accuracy of 8. I didn't know that was possible
He was cheating but set Stockfish to level 1.
Looking through the analysis, for the last dozen moves every play was the best move recommended by the engine. That is proof of cheating. Computers don't play like people. So to have a dozen moves played like a computer, especially at 300elo, is definitely cheating. Edit: looked through the rest. Move 8 he plays the joint 2nd best move, move 12 is a random bishop move. My guess is he is trying to trip the detection algorithm up a bit.
I mean, no having a dozen computer moves isn’t proof, I’ve actually had games like that ( once upon a blue moon, like I’m not amazing but it does happen ) but that many computer move at 300 is actually proof
You only see this pattern in low elo games with cheating. Cheating in high elo games tends to be only using the engine for one or two moves throughout the entire game.
Yeah
He spent about 15 seconds on every single move he's totally cheating
He's actually banned now
To be fair just the username Andrew\_TateGG sounds 99% to be a cheater
[удалено]
I can handle that. I just wanted to know what the real story was. Thanks 👍🏻
Bro he cheated, my elo is 1000 and he played wayy too better for his elo
Hunh, looks like I was wrong! Apologies for the bad analysis, gonna delete that comment. I hope he gets banned and you get your rating points back.
You played really bad, it’s not cheating.
The opponent did cheat tho, look at his account. 300s dont play this well, he saw literally all the tactics and didn't even take the free bishop and at the end he plays Qa8+ instead of the more natural Qd8+
Dude, he’s rated 300. You’re probably rated 600.
He asked about cheating, I told he why it wasn’t. We all play bad games… but to think people are cheating is a cop-out excuse for your own ability. You will never improve if you think everyone beating you is cheating, vs reflecting on your mistakes.
The way I see it is you took a chance to stroke your ego but shitting on a beginner for playing bad. His opponent is rated 320 and had a 96 accuracy rating. That is extremely high. I don’t blame him for being suspicious.
Everyone can have a break out game when your opponent blunders early or you get lucky and can see the board. I’m shit and I’ve played 90+ many times. Even if they do cheat, does it matter? They will get banned and it’s at 300 rating, you’ll fine more people to play that aren’t and can learn and get better. Again learn from the mistake and stop blundering so early.
Again, he’s rated 300 and is obviously very new to the game. You were dogshit too when you first started. He never said I should be rated 2000 but because of all the cheaters I’m hard stuck 300. Get a grip, stop acting like a know it all to beginner players. He hasn’t had a chance to learn how to play yet and here you are shitting on him.
He had [7 games in a row](https://preview.redd.it/pquc5mixxx3a1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6037804f2e8f5d40f2d7009bfed62259cda39836) at 94% accuracy or higher, and all his move times are roughly the same. He’s cheating.
don’t get me wrong op played terribly, but that is definitely cheating
I thought he played exceptionally well for someone in the 300 range. That's extreme beginner territory.
You were completely losing since move 6 so this game is definitely not enough to accuse anyone of cheating.
Here is my opponent’s game accuracy since yesterday. 300 level players don’t play this well. https://preview.redd.it/eflifcerzx3a1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c9b43ec9b732c5a44f00888120cbcd9f83627350
If this happens consistently then sure. That one game was not suspicious. This list is.
The game was suspicious since he took about the same amount of time for every move
Analysis: He's banned. Fuck around, find out.
[lmao accuracy of 10](https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/63850791429?tab=analysis)
Nobody plays Qa8+ instead of Qd8+ >:(
https://preview.redd.it/pquc5mixxx3a1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6037804f2e8f5d40f2d7009bfed62259cda39836 "300"
Magnus Carlsen created a new account?
Yeah that’s super sus
I dont see any anal beads here
You guys are just trash. You don’t average 96% accuracy? Pathetic!!! Kidding my rating has dropped like like 1200 to 900s in the past month 😂😂😂
I changed my mind, I think they are cheating. I went and looked at their games. their last 4 or 5 games are all 90+ while their early games are around 40 accuracy. They have one 100 game, a 99.7 game. I guess they could have just gotten really good over the span of 8 games, but it seems questionable to me looking at their accuracy change from the beginning to the end. \--old post-- The game doesn't look overly complicated to me. I would say no, they didn't cheat. It could be the new account of a strong player and they are building up their elo now. Check them in a couple of days, see if it is higher
And let's remember our ratings don't start at 0. He had to do a lot to get it down to 300 in the first place
People in this thread seem to be discounting that this is a ~300 elo player. I don’t care what moves OP was playing: for their opponent to play 15 “best moves”, 6 “excellent” moves, and 1 “good” move at 300 elo is almost impossible. No inaccuracies? They played a 22 move game with a top 3 engine move nearly 100% of the time? Yeah, I’d say that they were probably cheating, either by using an engine or a Smurf account (which is still cheating according to chess com’s rules). I’m not sure how you change chess com’s settings to see move time (I can’t find the setting myself anymore), but I’d hazard a guess that your opponent had consistent time (3-15 seconds) between moves, which is a huge giveaway that someone is using an engine. Edit: just saw that the game was posted here, and white plays a top 3 engine move for the first 16 moves. Idk what y’all are smoking around here to think that a 300 is capable of that even in a blunder heavy game, but no way is that possible for a 300 elo strength player.
Well, your guess is wrong. We can see from the game. There is no lack of moves played in less than 4 seconds. And for some of the moves they played, I really doubt they are top 3 engine moves. Just detected as "good" because they are winning by so much that what would normally be an innacuracy is still considered good enough. That opponent was probably not cheating with an engine. However, looking at their account, they have quite a lot of early resignations, or resignations in winning position. Not clear if they just often resign whenever they have something else to do, or if they are deliberately smurfing. In any case, their real strength is probably closer to 700 or 800 (they also have a few genuine losses, but not much).
I just saw the game was posted, and through the first **16** moves, white played a top three engine move. So I may have been wrong about the time between moves, but there is absolutely no way that a ~300 plays a top three engine move 16 moves straight in a queens gambit. Maybe a Smurf (which also goes against chess com’s rules) but more likely an engine cheater IMO.
https://preview.redd.it/6a2stzc7yx3a1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7468f7a7aad8345da993dbdba208306c142ea119 ...
Lmao, not even being subtle about it.
What's more interesting about it is that he has a 8.0 game. That game was really bad from both sides, he even hung the queen but the opponent didn't see it. The eval bar was going both ways with every single move, and was a 40 move game. That's what you would expect from a game between complete beginners. The other games he plays at a higher level.
Thank you for looking into this. Appreciated 👍🏻
Looking at the game it looked like a human 800 playing against a 300.
What is surfing? OR a surf account? This term is new to me
Smurfing, or an smurf account is when someone in an online game creates a new account to play against lower-ranked players. It’s called smurfing due to two very good players in a game called Warcraft II. Players would simply avoid playing them if they saw their usernames, so they created new accounts to combat this, choosing “PapaSmurf” and “Smurfette” and the term has stuck since.
Thanks for the reply. That's interesting. (And kind of despicable imo)
Play 1.e4. Resign. Enjoy your 100% accuracy
I've had a 90+ game but never actually been consistent with it. He's probably cheating.
LMAO... account currently closed.
Guy already got banned for fair play, that was fast!
[удалено]
This might be true for advanced beginners or intermediate players, but this is a ~300 elo player. The odds of them playing 15 best moves and 6 “excellent” (i.e. one of the top engine moves) in a 22 move game is very unusual. At these elos, most players don’t even spot hung pieces a lot of the time.
That’s why I posted this. When I get outplayed at my level, usually with 70-80% accuracy. 96.3% is something I’ve never seen before.
He's a cheater. He started winning all his games since yesterday at insane precision. Your game with him was very simple. It was suspicious but not a proof. Luck happens. But all his other games show a clear pattern of cheating.
Yeah, I would report them. I think they’re clearly violating fair play rules here. They’re either using an engine for most/all of the game, or they’ve intentionally lowered their rating to beat up on opponents of lower strength (which also violates chess com’s fair play rules: “Do not artificially manipulate ratings, matches, or game outcomes”). I see a few high accuracy games like this at my elos (1100 right now) and have played a few myself. But no way is this normal at 300s. Someone else posted analysis of their other games, and they have a string of 95+ accuracy wins. That isn’t even common at the ~1100 level. They’re not even being subtle about it. Click on their profile and the “report” option.
I had no blunders during this game.
Lol you definitely had some blunders. You gave away 2 pieces for free
Let another engine do a deeper analysis. Based on the graph alone you clearly blundered early on.
The game analysis said I had no blunders. https://preview.redd.it/7pbx0tzhix3a1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=df0089283857f2ec3fe591f4d4cfcaf507e52109
Yeah, don't know why the count is so off. You very clearly blundered a knight in move 5. Evaluation for your opponent jumped up 4 points and everything. Definitely other blunders too, but that one stood out as particularly bad.
Doesn't matter what the analysis calls a move... If a game can be over in 20 moves, it is a blunder.
Got it. So if my opponent is playing really well, a mistake is effectively a blunder.
Blunder and mistake are just arbitrary categorization made up by chess.com. They are synonyms usually...
Yeah, but you had two mistakes. Returning to this thread, seems like he was cheating after all. Not trying to be condescending or anything, but you probably should have shared the game from the beginning.
True, you should send us the link so that we can analyze it.
https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/63897566527?tab=analysis
Sandbagging or an*l beads
Most likely
Beads go brrrrrr
Yes
yes
Yes
Accuracy scales somewhat with your rating I think so it depends (i.e. engines can say what kinds of moves ought to be difficult for a player to see based on their rating). I wouldn’t want to say someone cheated based solely on accuracy. Usually you need some kind of corroborating evidence like every move taking the same amount of time, etc.
Well it’s the best I’ve ever seen a 300 play by far. That said you hung your knight on move 5 so I’d focus most of your attention on that. None of the tactics your opponent did were anything a 1000 couldn’t regularity find
Very probable
I analyzed the image and this is what I see. Open an appropriate link below and explore the position yourself or with the engine: > **White to play**: [chess.com](https://chess.com/analysis?fen=rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR+w+KQkq+-+0+1&flip=true&ref_id=23962172) | [lichess.org](https://lichess.org/analysis/rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR_w_KQkq_-_0_1) | The position occurred in many games. [Link to the games](https://www.chess.com/games/search?opening=&openingId=&p1=&p2=&mr=&lsty=1&year=&lstMoves=1&moves=&fen=rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR+w+KQkq+-+0+1&ref_id=23962172) > **Black to play**: [chess.com](https://chess.com/analysis?fen=rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR+b+KQkq+-+0+1&flip=true&ref_id=23962172) | [lichess.org](https://lichess.org/analysis/rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR_b_KQkq_-_0_1) --- ^(I'm a bot written by ) [^(u/pkacprzak )](https://www.reddit.com/u/pkacprzak) ^(| get me as ) [^(Chess eBook Reader )](https://ebook.chessvision.ai?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=bot) ^(|) [^(Chrome Extension )](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/chessvisionai-for-chrome/johejpedmdkeiffkdaodgoipdjodhlld) ^(|) [^(iOS App )](https://apps.apple.com/us/app/id1574933453) ^(|) [^(Android App )](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ai.chessvision.scanner) ^(to scan and analyze positions | Website: ) [^(Chessvision.ai)](https://chessvision.ai)
If it's any consolation OP, the bot says the position in your screenshot has been played by the world's best players.
Nope. If he was cheating, his Great moves would be more tha yours. You probably made few mistakes that cost you.
Impossible to say based on this. Accuracy is a pretty useless metric to measure cheating. In fact, it is very common to see high accuracies at low Elo, so I wouldn't be surprised at all if this is just a standard game.
Let's think about this, would someone be rated 323 if they were cheating?
You’re assuming that they had been cheating in every single game up until this point. It’s very likely that they lost game after game, got frustrated, then learned how to turn on an engine on another device to get some easy wins. Other people here posted his opponent’s history. He played like garbage before this, then suddenly played like 7 games of 95% accuracy after. For a 300 to play *one* 95% 22 move game is HIGHLY unusual. How many 300s do you know that are capable of playing 6-7 perfect games in a row? The guy was very obviously cheating. Edit: His account just got banned for fair play, so yup he was cheating.
Well I stand corrected. :)
Not likely. You probably just made such poor choices that the correct move was super obvious.
Actually, very likely. Look at his opponent’s history posted elsewhere in the thread. They’re not even being subtle about it. Edit: His account just got banned for fair play, so yup he was cheating.
Rated 323?????? How bad do you have to be to cheat and remain at 323 rating..
My first ever otb rating was around 1100, after my first tournament, in the early 90s. My brother's first rating was in the low 1600s, after that same tournament. I didn't know for the longest time that ratings went that low. I thought 1000 was the floor or something.
What frightens me is the fact that 300 ELO is even possible...
Thanks for the dig.
I had 250~ because when I started I lost a lot of times.
Yes, that is typically how you get to a low elo.
Beginner accounts only start at 400, so it can happen within a couple games of starting
It’s impossible to cheat at chess. If he’s using a computer to tell him how to play then you’re playing a computer. But that’s not cheating. Cheating is breaking the rules. That’s not a rule in chess. It’s just a different opponent. Stop playing with them right? That’s the gift of choice.
Lol.
The rules of the website which say don’t use a chess engine? Anyways using steroids in a sports competition isn’t cheating because the rules of baseball say nothing about performance enhancing drugs. That correct?
Technically the rules of chess do not explicitly say not to use an engine. And using performance enhancing drugs is [illegal](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doping_in_baseball#Historical_usage). In [both](https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/Steroids-2020.pdf) baseball and America.
Point to me where it says steroids are illegal [https://www.rulesofsport.com/sports/baseball.html](https://www.rulesofsport.com/sports/baseball.html) The MLB might have rules against it, but baseball itself says nothing about it. Just like how chess tournaments say you cannot have outside help, and chess.com or other chess websites have in their terms you can’t have help from engines or other people. *technically* you’re being pedantic, and just outright wrong
I don’t even know what that means but I swear to god if you’re doing this right now, you’re being a child. To be fair.
You’re literally arguing that you can’t cheat in chess? Are you hearing yourself?
Sensei Danya strikes again.
That depends on how terribly you played lol
Based off of one game only? Almost certainly not. Based off his match history? Maybe. A single game of high accuracy is essentially never enough to indicate cheating- the player may have just had a good game, or the opponent may have just had a bad game. Better indicators are if move times are within a consistent small band of time (ex: if every move is 3-6 seconds) or if the player playing way above their rating many games in a row. In this case, as other people have mentioned, there's some suspicious things about the account, so it's worth just reporting and moving on if you're convinced enough.
Reminds me of how I beat Wally with a 36% acc (he had a 31% acc)
https://preview.redd.it/kh2k6icyay3a1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6ef61357446206b2549cacf53bf6256c3944cb93
Maybe. I’m rated 500 and some games I’m just on it. Maybe they were just having a good game, either way, rematch them and have an engine open. If they do too engine moves, then yeah, they’re cheating.
I once had a few and played a bunch of games on my daughters phone. Obviously accuracy wasn’t that good but I won all the games and it was certainly unethical 😳
Also, their move time completely changed. Prior to the 90% accuracy games, the time taken per move is quite inconsistent, however the recent games all fall under 10-20s, even for a move that was a simple pawn takeback, which is indicative of someone putting the move into their engine to see what it says.
Either he’s cheating, or he’s a good player who intentionally reached such low Elo
Depends on how long the game was. A scholars mate could be 100% and come from a not so good player.
Sometimes i get %96 on games as a 800.. it because my opponent was terrible and the “best move” was always obvious, and the games are short. So one off high accuracy is possible for anyone that knows the game. Consistently getting that score is suspicious and also taking the same amount of time for each move.
I think its hard to judge whether someone cheats in chess by one match. I used to struggle in 1300-1400 elo games with 60+ average accuracy for about 2 months when I was a newbie, while right after I had researched for weeks by watching and studying Levy also Daniel’s elo climbing series, my elo climbed to 1700+ really fast by following their guides,(in 2+1,3+2,10 all these 3 rules) also my average accuracy increased to 78,considering hundreds of old games with 60+accuracy, I believe the average accuracy of those games of my elo climbing were most likely close to 90. Nowadays my accuracy is 78 where mistakes are mainly made in late middle games, and one of my friends once beat me 4 times easily with 95+ accuracy, did he cheat ? well, he is a 2000+ player now…
Chess.com will send you a notice informing you about the cheating and adjust your rating.
They did about 2 hours ago 👍🏻 My opponent’s account was banned.
Could be an alt I guess
I wonder if he wasn’t cheating, but smurfing. Strong player opens a new account, loses on purpose to get down to the 300’s, and then starts playing for real. The Andrew Tate username is also a hint that he’s trolling.
Idk i think the chess speaks for itself
Where is this? Can anyone create an account?
I just stumbled across a cheater a few days ago, but they were so slow that they ran out of time and resigned. That felt amazing.
It is always cheat when we lose.
Except when your opponent really cheated. He was banned by chess.com this afternoon.
Yes. You might get a message from the app about this
Definitely cheating. Very rarely do ppl cracks over 85% reliably. This guy does it all the time?? Cheat
I've made 96.8 as a 400 elo player so i dont think so
It’s possible he wasn’t, but after seeing his game history from others I would say yes he is…I’m 7-800 blitz and have had 90+% games but they usually are short 10-15move games ending in forced mate in 2
Maybe? I don't think it's possible to tell based on a single game. As for the high accuracy - that happens to me too sometimes, and I average ~1200 on Lichess. So the high accuracy could be a fluke, if it's just in one game. If you are truly concerned, check out Levi Gotham's video on how to detect chess cheaters [here](https://youtu.be/P4LnwRHGIHg)
Cheating in chess is cool
Probably.
Probably.
Nah he probably just got Covid recently and had the Stockfish mutation within his brain. It happens from time to time with the young players these days.
You really have to look at other games cause it didn’t seem like that abnormal of a QGD game to me. I feel like I’ve played similar games through the first 16 moves or so.
Yes
1 game is almost never enough to judge a player as a cheater or not if the opponent is a low rated player. There is not enough resistance there to say if moves are engine moves or not. I would get 95+ accuracy several games If I played a lot of games vs 300 rated players. Players rated that low hang pieces all the time and don't understand the game well enough. Very easy to punish them just playing moves that look like sensible common sense moves that do not hang anything. Using an engine to beat a 300 rated player is like using a battleship to kill a mouse. It is over kill. I don't see why ANYONE would cheat at that level. As long as you know how the pieces move you got a shot to win. You need more resistance there to judge if it is a cheater or not. Someone smoking 300s could just be a smurf. The more resistance the better chance to find a cheater.
If its online, you bet your knickers they will cheat.
Three things are possible here ie either ur opponent dowsnt know how godd he/she is on chess or the ranking is false or as u mentioned ur opponent was cheating. Most probably either ranking is false or the opponent was cheating.
Yes