odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 300
  • Posts: 8263
January 30th, 2011 at 9:00:18 AM permalink
Cheating at chess was discussed in another link.

I have been pretty convinced I ran into cheaters at yahoo chess, for one thing when I played at caissa.com [membership fee there] I found it was easier to keep a better rating! The players are more serious if they have to pay to play I think.

At chess dot com they talked quite a bit about cheating, showing that you can get that treatment at better sites, not just yahoo. Some tidbits from this link:

Quote: chess dot com


Why do people cheat?
... people like to win, want to feel important, and occasionally disregard the thoughts and feelings of others. Cheaters aren't necessarily horrible people - maybe just someone with low self-esteem who doesn't think that winning a game unfairly is a big deal ...

How does Chess.com detect cheating?
...One part of our analysis involves comparing human moves to computer moves and looking at statistical significance. The other parts are not public knowledge. We will never disclose our exact methods for catching cheaters .... it involves both cutting-edge technology and human judgment.



They say they are quite good at catching cheaters, which is interesting. I am guessing that they look for someone who stays in book all the time, his opponent always being the one to go out of book; and also for how fast a player can find mate. If mate can be had in 4 moves, say, the computer will find it in seconds but even good players will probably take many more moves most times, and certainly take a lot more time to find mate at the least.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
January 30th, 2011 at 10:27:57 AM permalink
I'd agree about the methods - it would be remarkably difficult to design a chess program which was sufficiently good at not playing like a chess program so as to pass a bot-check. I'd estimate that if someone were good enough at chess to create such a bot, they wouldn't need a bot to begin with.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
January 30th, 2011 at 10:39:23 AM permalink
Quote: odiousgambit

They say they are quite good at catching cheaters, which is interesting. I am guessing that they look for someone who stays in book all the time, his opponent always being the one to go out of book; and also for how fast a player can find mate. If mate can be had in 4 moves, say, the computer will find it in seconds but even good players will probably take many more moves most times, and certainly take a lot more time to find mate at the least.



There's a set of tactics you can use against such players, which mirrors the overall strategy you should use in tournaments against opponents with what you suspect is better "book" knowledge than you--use "irregular" openings. Even a computer is unlikely to have extensive files on 1. g3 or 1. Nc3. Then do NOT steer the game into tactical battles--keep the game closed, use maneuvering rather than bludgeoning. Computers excel at rapid tactical calculation, but for the most part, they still suck at positional evaluations. I find such games challenging and interesting even if I AM playing against some adolescent nerd's computer program rather than the nerd himself--the program would probably be a more pleasant conversationalist anyway.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
P90
P90
Joined: Jan 8, 2011
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 1703
January 30th, 2011 at 12:22:12 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

...use "irregular" openings. Computers excel at rapid tactical calculation, but for the most part, they still suck at positional evaluations.


Computers excel, period. Only professional level players have the skill to beat them, be it with regular or irregular openings. Modern computer chess software, even consumer level, is well above an amateur player in skill, and any tactic, other than using another piece of chess software or employing a grandmaster, is a losing one.
Resist ANFO Boston PRISM Stormfront IRA Freedom CIA Obama
odiousgambit
odiousgambit
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 300
  • Posts: 8263
January 30th, 2011 at 6:17:21 PM permalink
Quote: P90

Computers excel, period. Only professional level players have the skill to beat them, be it with regular or irregular openings. Modern computer chess software, even consumer level, is well above an amateur player in skill, and any tactic, other than using another piece of chess software or employing a grandmaster, is a losing one.



To beat an old game I still have [a computer/chessboard combination with real pieces] I am able to switch it away from using opening book at all, and of course select lower AI level. The thing is 20 years old though. Even at top level its end game can be beaten, but it will win if it gets ahead or has a passed pawn at about any level anyway.

edits
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
rxwine
rxwine
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
  • Threads: 163
  • Posts: 9513
January 30th, 2011 at 9:03:00 PM permalink
Quote:

. A mobile phone won a category 6 tournament with a performance rating 2898: chess engine Hiarcs 13 running inside Pocket Fritz 4 on the mobile phone HTC Touch HD won the Copa Mercosur tournament in Buenos Aires, Argentina with 9 wins and 1 draw on August 4–14, 2009.[16



That's from wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_chess
Quasimodo? Does that name ring a bell?
petro
petro
Joined: Dec 6, 2010
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 99
January 30th, 2011 at 11:09:29 PM permalink
There is no way unfortunatly to distinguish a good player from a program. The sites that try and catch chess cheats can only guess who is a computer player.
Even at the elite levels of chess there are accusations of computer cheating. See here; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqbakemLUy8

  • Jump to: