Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Amazing human...? = This whole thread is silly

Author: Terry Presgrove

Date: 11:55:02 08/24/99

Go up one level in this thread


On August 24, 1999 at 13:13:39, Mark Young wrote:

>On August 24, 1999 at 12:45:30, Terry Presgrove wrote:
>
>>On August 24, 1999 at 08:28:48, Shep wrote:
>>
>>>On August 24, 1999 at 04:02:10, rich wrote:
>>>
>>>>First of all, how can you know for sure this person is a cheater?
>>>>Innocent until found guilty, anyone ?!?
>>>>Second, I can't find any evidence in any of the posts in this thread.
>>>>Third, maybe all of you just can't realize that some unrated players
>>>>are very good chessplayers.I have myself beaten a GM once(I'm 1761 club-rating)
>>>
>>>Seconded. I happen to have quite a few friends who haven't played in rated
>>>tournaments in years (so they have no current ELO/USCF/DWZ rating whatsoever),
>>>yet still manage to play close to - and sometimes above - master strength.
>>>
>>>I think if that happens for about a dozen people I know, how many of them can
>>>you meet in a crowded club such as ICC? Don't take the equation
>>>"unrated=beginner" for granted.
>>>
>>>---
>>>Shep
>>
>> Hi Shep
>>
>> I agree with  you  that there are allot of very good unrated players
>> that are capable of winning against top programs. But three in a row in blitz
>> 5 5 using tactics without anti-computer techniques? Never using less than 3
>> seconds in the 3 0 game log is building up considerable evidence. Plus you
>> have the experience of the operator who has watched thousands of comp vs.
>> human games stretching over three decades. I'm not saying it is impossible but
>> you would have to use scientific notation to compute the odds. I do agree a
>> player is innocent until proven guilty and am opposed to using names/handles
>> in an accusing manner in this forum unless there is clear condemning evidence
>> presented.
>
>The real question is why do we even care about this, the games are meaningless,
>the ratings are meaningless. Nothing people post, say, or do will stop people
>from cheating. What do you expect from games played over the internet.
>
>I get hit all the time by people cheating with computers when I am testing a new
>program online, but it does not make much sense to bitch about it on CCC, or
>make protest after protest to the admin of fics or icc etc. I have better things
>to do with my time, like play more chess:)

  I understand your frustration with ICC & FICS on how they deal with
  cheaters. You mentioned testing new programs, my question is how can you
  get an accurate determination of the programs strength if ratings don't
  mean anything? There has to be some standard whereby we gauge playing
  strength? If ratings don't mean anything on ICC then what would happen
  if you didn't have any? Cheaters skew the ratings and while its true
  no matter what you do there will always be some, I do think you can't
  just give up on this issue because if we do then there is no reference
  for determining playing strength and improvement for human or program
  on whatever chess server we play on. I do not agree that the games are
  meaningless but if we don't address this issue they will become so.


  TP



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.