Earlier quoted context omitted.
Newcomers definitely make naive assumptions, Chesterton's fence etc. I'm not a newcomer though, I've worked on both cheats and anti-cheats going back more than two decades. I know how the sausage is made and it's not pretty. The anti-cheat companies you talk about mostly sell a mass produced product that works very similarly to anti-virus software. Games embed the anti-cheat module and its cheat definitions get updat…
Picking out the statistical outliers are not that hard, but will this not have diminishing returns? As soon as the cheaters learns that being too obvious gets you banned they'll change up how they play. Eventually there wont be much difference between the really good players and cheaters, is some false positives okay here? Many cheaters were already trying to not be obvious, most I've encountered playing various fps…
I'm definitely not advocating for doing less to counter cheaters. I'm just talking about how more could be done. As in, continue with existing methods and add new ones.
Also, yeah many cheaters would start being more conservative and manage to evade detection. However that is also a win. It's the aggressive obvious cheaters that are the worst, because it makes it obvious that the fight was unfair. If the cheater made it look plausibly legit, then the victim won't feel as bad.