So then you should just close your chess.com account, because there is no point for it existing.
Kramnik Hates Chess.com
Sort:
ibrust wrote:
basketstorm wrote:
ibrust wrote:
Of course you did - you said having the engine running during the game is cheating, even if you're not analyzing the current position.
Outright lie and manipulation. I did not say "even if you're not analyzing the current position", that's your interpretation. From my previous posts it is clear that I understand the situation with engine usage in all details and it's clear that by running I meant starting it to analyze the ongoing game.
but you clearly said Danya was cheating.
Do you think lying will make your points valid or what? What is this? Is this your way of debating? Very low level. Much lower than Elo in my profile lol.
ou know, because he's actually contributing something
I never said Danya is not contributing or that Danya is bad or that Danya is a cheater. You have a distorted perception of my posts.
basketstorm wrote:
b) "it's a violation to use the engine to analyze the position you're playin" -- sure that's what he violated and admitted that and apologized. Speedrun or not, that's a violation.
Danya used the engine to analyze move 8 of the game while he was on move 20. He was not analyzing the position after the queen was donated, that was not the critical position in the game. You said what he did was cheating. So if analyzing a position that isn't on the board isn't cheating what argument do you have? He didn't cheat and that's obvious, end of discussion.
I was watching along to this debate, and about 4 comments ago, you claimed that you would stop responding.
I put it to you that you are aware that basketstorm has a strong point. You can't really dispute it. So what do you do? You launch personal attacks about ratings and threaten to run
JuniorS-B wrote:
So then you should just close your chess.com account, because there is no point for it existing.
Why? I can still participate in discussions and use other features apart from online pvp.
Suit yourself. If you aren't willing to play people because they must be cheating, idk why you even play in the first place.
JuniorS-B wrote:
Suit yourself. If you aren't willing to play people because they must be cheating, idk why you even play in the first place.
I don't play online pvp. And you should not.
JuniorS-B wrote:
And he is one of the top 5 players all time in bullet I'd say. So he is obviously good at chess. Without an engine.
That is the issue. Kramnik is insinuating that Danya's ELO is inflated due to computer cheating.
Please tell me how to cheat at bullet chess.
Also, I have gotten to be a 2100ish player because I almost exclusively play other people. That is how you get experience. Bots are not good simulations of reality. They are programmed to blunder.
Also, I drew non-smurfed Mittens twice. Your score was?
Artful_Chess_Dodger wrote:
JuniorS-B wrote:
And he is one of the top 5 players all time in bullet I'd say. So he is obviously good at chess. Without an engine.
That is the issue. Kramnik is insinuating that Danya's ELO is inflated due to computer cheating.
Danya himself admitted that his rating is inflated, not because of cheating of course. But even that proves that Kramnik was not "completely" wrong. He had valid reasons to suspect Danya. That's my point. Everyone say Kramnik is just paranoid and attacked Danya randomly. No, he had reasons. I myself don't think Danya is a cheater but I don't think Kramnik is paranoid either, his line of thinking is completely sane, he is directed by pure logic.
ibrust wrote:
bossybwudx wrote:
ibrust wrote:
Â
Danya used the engine to analyze move 8 of the game while he was on move 20. He was not analyzing the position after the queen was donated, that was not the critical position in the game. You said what he did was cheating. So if analyzing a position that isn't on the board isn't cheating what argument do you have? He didn't cheat and that's obvious, end of discussion.
I was watching along to this debate, and about 4 comments ago, you claimed that you would stop responding.
I put it to you that you are aware that basketstorm has a strong point. You can't really dispute it. So what do you do? You launch personal attacks about ratings and threaten to run
Your post is a good example for why I am shunning these allegations - public stupidity spreads like a virus. The moment someone disproves one of these allegations you people claim you never accused anyone and you move to something else - we can't be burdened playing whack-a-mole and whacking endlessly every one of these arguments that pop up, what we need to do is publicly shame you imbeciles until you stop spreading this mind-virus.
There has been no strong point - what is the strong point? You alluded to one, but you didn't mention what it was.
It is obvious from watching Danyas stream what he was doing. It was not suspicious, it did not raise doubts in my mind or the minds of most others. No one believes Danya did anything problematic, not even you... so your point is what? Kramnik was completely wrong. I was right from the beginning, because I knew Danya didn't cheat.
Look in the dictionary for the word 'suspicion' then you might be more aware of the strong point. Suspicion will raise questions,...and questions need answers. That's all I have to say
JuniorS-B wrote:
Please tell me how to cheat at bullet chess.
Also, I have gotten to be a 2100ish player because I almost exclusively play other people. That is how you get experience. Bots are not good simulations of reality. They are programmed to blunder.
Also, I drew non-smurfed Mittens twice. Your score was?
I could tell how to cheat in bullet you but my post would be used for wrong purposes.
Bots are not "programmed to blunder", that's a myth.
ibrust wrote:
He plays only bots because he's convinced he can't climb above 360 due to mass online cheating, he's gone into detail about this in other threads.
That's wrong, it's not about me "climbing". There are many reasons to stop playing online pvp. I never complained about how my rating is low or how I can't climb or anything like that. I don't care about online rating as much as you do.
ibrust wrote:
If the bot wasn't programmed to blunder it would not play at 360 level, would it dunce?
Another insult, I am reporting and want to bring mods' attention to this. This is unacceptable.
ibrust wrote:
bossybwudx wrote:
ibrust wrote:
bossybwudx wrote:
ibrust wrote:
Danya used the engine to analyze move 8 of the game while he was on move 20. He was not analyzing the position after the queen was donated, that was not the critical position in the game. You said what he did was cheating. So if analyzing a position that isn't on the board isn't cheating what argument do you have? He didn't cheat and that's obvious, end of discussion.
I was watching along to this debate, and about 4 comments ago, you claimed that you would stop responding.
I put it to you that you are aware that basketstorm has a strong point. You can't really dispute it. So what do you do? You launch personal attacks about ratings and threaten to run
Your post is a good example for why I am shunning these allegations - public stupidity spreads like a virus. The moment someone disproves one of these allegations you people claim you never accused anyone and you move to something else - we can't be burdened playing whack-a-mole and whacking endlessly every one of these arguments that pop up, what we need to do is publicly shame you imbeciles until you stop spreading this mind-virus.
There has been no strong point - what is the strong point? You alluded to one, but you didn't mention what it was.
It is obvious from watching Danyas stream what he was doing. It was not suspicious, it did not raise doubts in my mind or the minds of most others. No one believes Danya did anything problematic, not even you... so your point is what? Kramnik was completely wrong. I was right from the beginning, because I knew Danya didn't cheat.
Look in the dictionary for the word 'suspicion' then you might be more aware of the strong point. Suspicion will raise questions,...and questions need answers. That's all I have to say
Look up the word "obvious" and the term "common sense", and use your brain instead of relying on Kramniks in the future.
I'm not relying on anyone.... I'm using my own brain... and things looked suspicious.... You think that once a person is using their brain they would automatically agree with you right?
That's another point that you are missing
ibrust wrote:
If the bot wasn't programmed to blunder it would not play at 360 level, would it? Obviously not.
I challenge you to a best of 3 match of bullet chess.... We are in the same rating range for that format
The winner of that game would be the one who is correct in the coversation.
Ready?
@basketstorm, go ahead and send me a private message with how to cheat at bullet chess. Nobody but me will know. And I don't play actual bullet anyway.
ibrust wrote:
I was correct and you weren't, so obviously your brain failed you didn't it?
It wasn't suspicious, it was obvious he wasn't cheating. Completely obvious. Just a simple assessment of motive will tell you a 3200 player vs. an 1100 player would just never see any reason to cheat in a game like that. Why would you cheat if you are 3200 playing an 1100? And the fact he said outright he was doing analysis in an educational speedrun made it even more obvious. The fact he openly told his audience what the engine was saying made it yet more obvious... because cheaters don't do that, do they? Did Hans come out, before being caught, and admit he had cheated in the past? Obviously not, because cheaters don't do that, do they?
Stupid. Yes, I'm publicly shaming you dunces. You shouldn't be making cheating accusations on this site anyway, that's a violation of the rules in the first place. But how do we dispense with this madness without public shaming? No amount of reason is enough - next week it'll be a new accusation from Kramnik and we'll be in here yet again debating some obvious thing for an hour and a half.
Quoting before he edits out, thinking mods won't see
ibrust wrote:
I was correct and you weren't, so obviously your brain failed you didn't it?
It wasn't suspicious, it was obvious he wasn't cheating. Completely obvious. Just a simple assessment of motive will tell you a 3200 player vs. an 1100 player would just never see any reason to cheat in a game like that. Why would you cheat if you are 3200 playing an 1100? And the fact he said outright he was doing analysis in an educational speedrun made it even more obvious. The fact he openly told his audience what he was doing made it yet more obvious... because cheaters don't do that, do they? Did Hans come out, before being caught, and admit he had cheated in the past? Obviously not, because cheaters don't do that, do they?
Stupid. Yes, I'm publicly shaming you dunces. You shouldn't be making cheating accusations on this site anyway, that's a violation of the rules in the first place.
Just so you know... your responses only show how emotional you are.
You are a fanboy of Danya, so things will not be suspicious to you. Does not mean it doesn't seem suspicious to people who are neutral though.
JuniorS-B wrote:
@basketstorm, go ahead and send me a private message with how to cheat at bullet chess. Nobody but me will know. And I don't play actual bullet anyway.
Why do you need this? Cheating is not nice. I bet you'll report me after that. If you really want you can find yourself. You think fast time controls could prevent cheating? That's wrong, engines are not that slow on modern computers. Analysis happens in realtime without a need to manually copy/input moves. Everything is lightning fast.
So then let's just assume everyone cheats. You cheat, I cheat. Magnus cheats, Kramnik cheats. Everyone cheats. Online chess is dead. Why do you play if everyone cheats? There is no point.
By any standard, I cannot prove my cheating innocence online. Neither can you. Neither can Kramnik. Neither can Danya, or anyone. It's dead. Chess can only be OTB folks, and if it's OTB, nobody cares?
Exactly.