Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chess’s Cheating Crisis

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 284 posts

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#211

Post by bluGill »

mellosouls wrote: post #94

Why would anybody do this? It's not even like cheating in athletics where you can plausibly claim to be doing it yourself (just using illegal enhancements). Here it is something else doing it for you. Bizarre that anybody would take pride from doing it, especially considering the risk of being found out.

At the high level winners can take home > $100,000, but only a few of these events happen every year. If you love chess and want to make it a job you need to win a few tournaments every year (you may have to pay travel expenses to get there).

Cheating is the difference between getting a "real job" for many, so there is a reason.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#212

Post by egsmi »

busyant wrote: post #197
georgiecasey wrote: post #117

I used to cheat on chess.com. It started as a small bit of cheating here and there, just checking every now and then if the move I was going to make was the best. Of course, the computer always had a better move and then I examine the line and told myself I probably would have thought of that! Like a drug, it escalated and I was checking moves all the time. I was never caught but I was ashamed and just stopped playin…

I cheated on Lichess--once. Story: I got paired with someone rated 400 points higher than me (no idea why). The dude was destroying me, but somewhere in the middlegame, he let his guard down and exposed himself to a mate-in-one. For once in my life, I saw the mate and I won. The dude was FURIOUS. He immediately asked for a rematch and I said I had to go. Then the insults came ("chicken shit", etc.). He even messaged…

That has happened to me more than once too. I usually take the rematch because I can often win the second game too, I’ll guess 15% of the time. Almost always the better player is trying an opening trap which is dubious but will cause me to loose in the first 10 moves if I miss it. So I just make really sure to look for tactics extra carefully in the opening. If I survive I can often win. And if I loose I get to learn a new opening trap. :)

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#213

Post by Waterluvian »

georgiecasey wrote: post #117

I used to cheat on chess.com. It started as a small bit of cheating here and there, just checking every now and then if the move I was going to make was the best. Of course, the computer always had a better move and then I examine the line and told myself I probably would have thought of that! Like a drug, it escalated and I was checking moves all the time. I was never caught but I was ashamed and just stopped playin…

I learned the “it sucks all joy out” lesson as a child when I cheated my entire way through Goldeneye 64. I got to the end and felt so unfulfilled.

I discovered that you’re better off walking away from a game that feels so insurmountably difficult rather than cheat a bit or a lot.

“I’m not going to finish so why not cheat to see the ending?” Was always disappointing. I’d rather that mountain still exist off in the distance that I’ll never summit.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#214

Post by bluGill »

lanius wrote: post #169

How much money is on the line? Cheating is also an issue in esports, where all serious tournaments are played offline.

I'm not sure, but hundreds of thousands for sure. World Champion matches each player gets a million (the winner is invited back next year). Until this year the real money was in offline tournaments, but this year to have a tournament at all it needs to be online. There have been big money online tournaments before, but they were not nearly as big as the offline.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#216

Post by gnulinux »

lapetitejort wrote: post #173
bjourne wrote: post #77

I had a math exam a long while ago. One of those three hour long and the professor had me seated by myself in the math library. So I asked: - There's tons of math books here. How can you know I won't cheat? - Bjourne, do you intend to cheat? - No, of course not. - Alright. Good luck on your exam!

For some classes, especially as you get higher in fields, no amount of open books will help you in an exam. If you're able to figure out the material using a book then and there while not knowing it before, you deserve the grade.

When I was an undergrad (UC Berkeley) all Math and CS classes beyond basics (like Calculus etc) allowed "cheat sheets" in exams and some were "open book" (i.e. bring whatever the fuck you want (nothing digital of course, just paper, no calculator)). I don't remember an incident when bringing a cheat sheet was useful during the exam, maybe 1 time for a minor thing. Writing out the cheat sheet before the exam definitely helps learning though. If it's something you can look up during the exam, it's not gonna be something professor will ask you. If it's something you need to read, understand and conceptualize during the exam, it's gonna take you long enough that it'll be a significant disadvantage.

EDIT: Now I remembered haha, our first CS class even printed out standardized cheat sheets and gave it to everyone. They basically printed ALL the slides of the class in tiny font on 3 papers and handed out to everyone with the exam. Fun times. I didn't even open the cheat sheet lol.

I remember I was taking Algebra 2, which was about Module Theory and Galois Theory. We asked prof if we can bring cheat sheet to the exam, he was like "I mean I don't care, you can even bring the textbook". So I did but, obviously didn't even open it. If you really need to remember something (e.g. definition of Noeterian Ring) professor may write it in the question anyway, or if you need to remember something basic (e.g. definition of Group) you could technically use the textbook, but at that point, you'll likely fail the exam anyway.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#217

Post by wildmanx »

the-dude wrote: post #69
wildmanx wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's depending on what you consider a "performance enhancing substance". With basic food and drinks, we surely all agree that that's not the case. But the line starts to get blurry with supplements. Whey? Creatine? Caffeine? Supplement stores are full of this stuff, and a lot is really just a waste of money and exists to milk the amateur gym bro cash cow. But some of those things help. And eventually you cross the…

Let's take hormones. Once upon a time there is an athlete who has naturally high level of certain hormone. Research is conducted and the anti-doping agency moves up the level of how much the hormone is legal to have in the blood. Now all competitors will take additional hormones to reach, but not cross said level. As long as this works, they think of themselves as not doping and levelling the playing field. But they…

Morally, taking that hormone is still wrong. And so should it be according to the rules too.

If you now answer that it's unfair that the person with naturally occurring higher levels can have it but those with lower levels can't "level" the playing field, well, tough luck. That's just the lottery that gives some people an advantage in certain sports. We all accept that some people are naturally tall and therefore have advantages in basketball. Or some people have naturally stronger VO2 max and thereby advantages in endurance sports.

The competition is how far you can get with the _natural state_ of your body, plus training. Not how far you can get as long as everybody pumps some substances up to a previously-agreed-upon threshold. Those thresholds are just the sad plan-B solution of anti-doping agencies if they can't directly measure doping substances and need to resort to measuring the effects instead. That actually disadvantages those with naturally higher effects.

Nobody would think of restricting maximum leg length, and as long as your legs are not longer than that it's fine to surgically extend them.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#218

Post by the-dude »

wildmanx wrote: post #217
the-dude wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's take hormones. Once upon a time there is an athlete who has naturally high level of certain hormone. Research is conducted and the anti-doping agency moves up the level of how much the hormone is legal to have in the blood. Now all competitors will take additional hormones to reach, but not cross said level. As long as this works, they think of themselves as not doping and levelling the playing field. But they…

Morally, taking that hormone is still wrong. And so should it be according to the rules too. If you now answer that it's unfair that the person with naturally occurring higher levels can have it but those with lower levels can't "level" the playing field, well, tough luck. That's just the lottery that gives some people an advantage in certain sports. We all accept that some people are naturally tall and therefore hav…

So why do we have different leagues for men and women then?

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#219

Post by autokad »

busyant wrote: post #197
georgiecasey wrote: post #117

I used to cheat on chess.com. It started as a small bit of cheating here and there, just checking every now and then if the move I was going to make was the best. Of course, the computer always had a better move and then I examine the line and told myself I probably would have thought of that! Like a drug, it escalated and I was checking moves all the time. I was never caught but I was ashamed and just stopped playin…

I cheated on Lichess--once. Story: I got paired with someone rated 400 points higher than me (no idea why). The dude was destroying me, but somewhere in the middlegame, he let his guard down and exposed himself to a mate-in-one. For once in my life, I saw the mate and I won. The dude was FURIOUS. He immediately asked for a rematch and I said I had to go. Then the insults came ("chicken shit", etc.). He even messaged…

on lichess, after every game I use the analysis tool to see all the good moves I missed, and sometimes play out alternate endings. my game has improved a lot because of it, but people get furious with me because I don't accept rematches. If I rematch, I wont have the game fresh in memory and miss the opportunity to learn

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#220

Post by thope »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #208
ritchiea wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lichess will flag your account as a cheater w/o notifying you so that your opponents see the flag and avoid games. I know this because a friend of mine who is an average player got flagged that way after a stretch of games he won handily, including one against me where I checked computer analysis and noticed he made zero incorrect moves. A red flag popped up next to his screenname, I asked if he was aware of it and h…

They should pair cheaters with cheaters.

this is how it works, there is a whole alternative lichess universe where shadow-banned users play each others.
Post reply on HN