First edited on May 14th 1999
Here are parts of some of the 500+ messages or emails I received from well over 200
different ICS members playing on 8 different ICSes
over the last 3 years. I narrowed down all these to 78 messages or emails (coming from 70 different
ICS members of 8 different ICSes) which I felt
were the most insightful and relevant ones. I deliberately censored all parts of these
messages/emails revealing the ICS handle of the authors, the handles of the people they suspect or
were talking about and the ICS on which they play. Censored ICS handles are identified with the *censored* string. Censored digits (ratings, age, tcs, etc,...) are identified with the " * " character.
4 months ago, an ICS admin told me and repeated in an email that I was "a bit crazy and so fanatical" about the cheating problem/situation. He had not read all my homepage and didn't reply when I asked him to read it in its entirety. The future of internet chess is at stake here, no more, no less: chess programs are and will be more and more humanlike, some come (will soon come?) with connectivity capabilities to internet chess servers and soon all forms of wild chess will be playable by chess programs. More and more national chess federations will be interested in organizing internet tournaments for their members; technology in history (McLuhan) has always had a magnetic convergence impact (merged integration) on less technologized forms of communication.
While reading these messages and emails, the readers of this web page are invited to ask themselves if their authors are exaggerating, paranoid, obsessed with cheating, overreacting, imaginating things about cheating. Are they inventing problems that only exist in their fantasies? You, the readers, be the judge: you don't require a high IQ to understand wht is going on. Consider what these messages have to say regarding the following topics: accelerated pace of time controls to avoid cheaters, constant atmosphere of suspicions, easily triggered doubts, feelings of helplessness, exasperation from meeting cheaters, loss of enjoyment, intentionally and deliberately avoiding long tcs and its consequences, personal reasons for joining an ICS, will to improve, desire to learn, the honest playing members' needs, fears, hopes and many of other topics. Most messages are supportive of my homepage while some others ... I don't mind a clash of views. I don't know how many authors of these messages and
emails are still playing on an ICS, how many quit, in despair, disgusted or in silence, their ICS or
simply internet chess. 5 messages/emails are from caught cheaters and active cheaters. I decided to
include them in this part because they were meaningful regarding the topics addressed so far in this
homepage.
May 97
1) 21:41 12-May-97 Amen to your note 8...I think it's only a matter of a few years till these
computers penetrate the OTB tourneys. A pocket machine and a trip to the bathroom at key times...who
knows?
September 97
2) 13:49 13-Sep-97 I read your fi notes, and I agree that computer abuse is a serious problem and bound to get worse.
3) 03:07 17-Sep-97 Your notes express my thoughts exactly. I've been tracking *censored handle* for a while now, I'm 90% certain he's a computer user. I've beaten *censored handle* several times in bullet/lightning...he's good but his standard rating is nearly **00!! He used to have a finger note saying his USCF rating was **00...after his rating skyrocketed, he took the note out.
4) 19:42 21-Sep-97 I recently read your notes. . . .CHEATERS SUCK. . . . .I am the individual responsible for having *censored handle*'s account turned into a computer account. After playing him in bullet/lightning, I realized that there was NO way a **00 rated player played that bad in 1 0 .
5) 23:47 21-Sep-97 From a manual (C) operator: I've been catching
cheaters on a regular basis through use of my software. I've reported them to the admins, but
strangely enough *an ICS* is dragging its feet instead of doing something about it. Please read my
finger notes also.
October 97
6) 10:47 23-Oct-97 I think you may be a bit paranoid about the cheating thing. :) I haven't had a
problem at all.
7) 11:42 15-Jan-98 Dear Sir, no matter how many times I read your finger notes, I just love them. They expressed my exact feelings too. (...) I think people at all level play on their own until their rating drops to their deserved rating, then they start to cheat and gain points in order to play higher rated. Your notes spoke all I wanted to say. They are the real losers. Also the abused too! I hate to play on *an ICS* nowadays, because it reduces my tournament confidence! (...) Only way to stop people cheating is 4 0 or 3 0, people can still cheat at 5 0. But in 4 0/3 0 I play not chess but blunders. (...) When I play my utmost best, people higher rated accuse me of cheating in standard, this is another point I hate. Therefore, when I play I am afraid of people thinking I am cheating, and I am afraid they cheat on me too. So, in either way, I hate to play on *an ICS*. Without cheaters, *an ICS* could be a great place to play and improve chess.
8) 22:50 30-Jan-98: From a GM: I looked at *censored handle-X*'s game
vs. *censored (C) account handle*, and I think you are way off the base on this one. The reason why
he played those moves so quickly is PROBABLY because he had played this before.
Note: 3 days later, on feb. 2nd 98, that ICS +(C)ed handle-X. Was that ICS also
way off the base?
February 98
9) 11:16 15-Feb-98 I disagree with your finger notes. I've never had a problem with (C)heating on *an ICS*, although I guess it could happen....By advertising that cheating is widespread when you have no proof is to instill paranoia and may actually cause more people to use computers to inflate their ratings. SHAME ON YOU!!!!!!!
10) 21:33 18-Feb-98 I updated my finger file and hope it does something to rid us of these
scumbags!!
March 98
11) 14:24 06-Mar-98 You missed some neat stuff today on computer use; couple of guys said they are afraid to play and win in tournaments for fear of being branded cheats.
12) 20:23 22-Mar-98 I'm glad to see your advice on combatting cheating. I suggest that you add who the information should be messaged to (when reporting suspicions).
13) 15:38 29-Mar-98 I played this guy, *censored handle* just now, and he made moves 1-12 exactly out of *chess program*'s opening book and then 13-20 made SAME moves as *chess program*. Plus he's been playing only computers and beating them. And he used up so little time off the clock. He had 4+ minutes and I had 2+ minutes. Required no effort, been playing for 45 years but still only **00 player yet he's beating **00-**00 machines.
14) 19:02 30-Mar-98 From an IM: Just read your finger notes. Wow! Food for thought!
15) 11:43 31-Mar-98 I just sent this message to *ICS admin* and *ICS admin* 'If you ever have
time, please read DrUnclear's finger notes, it speaks (if not for most of us) for me. I don't enjoy
and learn chess anymore by playing * 0 now, because I notice people cheats in standard even in * 0.'
August 98
16) 20:30 11-Aug-98 Amen !! just read your letter.. my GOD I've played those people! One guy came up with all these moves of an odd opening but ran out of time at move 14! must have had a slow page turner!
17) 05:54 14-Aug-98 I asked *censored handle* why doesn't he register as (C) and his reply was '*censored handle* tells you: I don't know how' ... He also admits that he uses *censored chess program*.
18) 20:57 14-Aug-98 You are doing a great job of putting the (C)HEATERS in their place. After reading your notes, I realize that their conduct is even more damaging than I thought. Thanks, and don't give up the fight!
19) 18:18 28-Aug-98 From an IM: I read your finger; very intriguing and
I totally agree.
September 98
20) 00:55 09-Sep-98 your notes suck! Note: this one didn't like his new (C)
title.
October 98
21) 19:34 05-Oct-98 From an admin: Can you send an apology for me to
DrUnclear. I have had much more fun here not using my computer than I ever did with it. Just tell
him thanks for getting me to realize just what chess is all about again.
November 98
22) Fri Nov 20 23:14:37 Super Great Article on your web site on Computer Cheaters. What about all the players who sandbag to hold their ratings down (...) My guess is that at the top end the computers are a problem and at the bottom end the people who hold their rating down are the problem..These guys do not deny that they never lost a game on purpose but they will try to avoid the issue with talk like 'well sometimes I'm not feeling so good'. (...) I tried to propose that there NOT be any prizes because then they would not have that incentive to cheat.
23) Sat Nov 21 09:39:18 I have become frustrated with cheats such as *censored handle*, *censored
handle*, *censored handle*, etc., etc., etc. ad infinitum. So much so, that I wait to join standard
tourneys till they are nearly filled in order to avoid the piss ants.
December 98
24) 18:45 01-Dec-98 I liked your crusade against computer cheaters. It's always bugged me too.
25) Thu Dec 03 23:48:17 Thank you for exposing me on *an ICS*. I am having way more fun now. All ratings have been adjusted down to what they should be. Again thanks.
26) 12:08 21-Dec-98 I've finished the entire article. Interesting! I certainly have played people who's rating is similar to mine when they were clearly much stronger. But I was wondering, how would such a situation develop? How would a person, using a computer, have a rating of **00 with a high of **00?
27) 18:27 21-Dec-98 I visited your page about (C)heaters on ICSes. It's impressing (and scaring)... Let's hope that as much players as possible read this page and that it will help *an ICS* in the end.
28) 20:25 22-Dec-98 Feel free to add my name. If you read the chess newsgroups you will know I have had one person banned from here already for cheating (*censored handle*).
29) Wed Dec 23 14:49:51 I appreciate the crusade you are leading against computer cheating on *an ICS* but I think you should know that certain players have become rather paranoid about the subject. A few months ago I played three suicide/losers games against *censored handle*. I was *censored handle*. He is about 200 points stronger than me but needless to say he lost three in row. He immediately concluded that I was cheating. How else could he possibly lose so badly? Not only did *censored handle* go ballistic but he got another member involved. After a few seconds of analysis, that other member decided that the games were computer played. Totally untrue of course. I argued with these two via tells for quite a while and nothing came of it. It turned out that *censored handle* was taking 1-2 secs per move while I was using all my time. Suicide/losers is a game of forcing moves and it is very easy to win 'brilliantly' if you spot the right line. *Censored handle* is a strong but erratic player who apparently cannot accept the fact that his play is often less than perfect.
30) Sun Dec 27 15:11:17 Very nice and very true page. A problem I've talked many times of with my friends *censored handle* and *censored handle* on *an ICS* and on *an ICS*, we took many times to analyse suspicious games with *chess program*
31) Tue Dec 29 11:28:26 I looked up your fi notes. You certainly had some eye-opening
observations. Cheating always bugged me. I have no doubt that I have run into this problem a few
times, but unfortunately I didn't know I had recourses: I didn't follow up. I will now if I suspect
foul play. Thanks for your excellent article on the subject.
32) Tue Jan 05 14:33:08 DrUnclear, I appreciate your candidness in discussing cheating on chess servers. A year or so ago I spotted two, *censored handle* and one I forget, obviously using computers and reported them and was disappointed in the admins reply. They had no interest and said 'anyways, how can you be so sure?' I believe in your philosophy of airing problems as a means of solving them (...)
33) Tue Jan 05 16:06:41 Having read your article on computers (...), I agree with you entirely about cheaters attitude to real players (good or bad), and have twice had the feeling of playing an all seeing brick wall, impossible to crack etc. However I tried to look at the games under some chess software I have, but found no conclusive proof. I am against falsely accusing players of cheating, however that doesn't reduce the feeling of disgust at battling for nothing! The message is of two points, the first is to say thank you for taking the time to publish something on the subject (I've got 1 line in my finger notes!) (...)
34) 08:55 09-Jan-99 I played *censored (C) handle*, a semi-high rated comp yesterday. It beat me after a tough game. While looking through *censored (C) handle* history, I noticed two games it played and lost against *censored handle* which in turn I decided to analyze the games. To my dismay, *censored handle* not only played errorless games but didn't take hardly anytime (under 20 min in a 90 min. game). I don't know *censored handle* and have never even spoke with him but I've seen him win quite a few standard tourneys and these games vs. *censored (C) handle* were definitely not on a human intellect basis.
35) Mon Jan 11 17:33:37 1999 Comments: This message did NOT originate from the
Sender address above. It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software. The message
sender's identity is unknown and virtually not replyable. (...) (part of email header)
Hi there, I have read your page about cheaters. It is true that a lot
of the players on ICSes are using chess
programs for their games. All the things you wrote about "they don't care" (Re:
Part #5: (C)heaters don't care !) is pretty true.
I'm a 2200 uscf player and I was tricked many times by people who cheated on me, so I decided to
play with a chess program too. Yea, it's not the same thing as playing by yourself but you learn a
lot, I don't care about the credit, about rating, and such. Yea, titled players are better to play
against cause you see how a chess program can beat them and it helps your own game.
You have to understand something, chess is ONLY a game, it's a good game but after all it got
nothing to do with anything. Take it within its perspective dada..
P.S.: maybe I'll cheat against you one day :) hehe
36) Wed Jan 13 11:19:29 I joined *an ICS* last month with the intention of meeting new people and, at the same time, improving my game. At ** yrs of age and a recently retired *censored profession* in New York City, I'm not shocked by much. This, however, really 'throws' me. These people who cheat are super weak individuals. They also are the ones who can't take it OTB. I've played some rated games that I lost when I first joined due to nerves and the newness of *an ICS*. While playing a guest one day he asked me 'Do you have software?' I replied with the question, 'What?'. I've signed on as a guest occasionally and have noticed a great disparity in the level of play. One 'guest' had the nerve to type back, 'I own you' after he, or more probably his software, beat me. I agree 100% with you that the only way to control it (somewhat) is to weed out and expose the cheaters! While I've only played 30+ rated games so far, I think some are using software when they get into a bind------their openings/middle games are not strictly book but they play very exact endgames. Are they trying to disguise the computer use? While this was noticed playing against guests I will be on the lookout for abuse with *an ICS* members. While presently rated **00 or so, I feel I am stronger than my rating indicates------time will tell. Lastly, let me just say that I have a real passion for the game. These (C)heaters will never experience that--------not only in chess but most probably in anything. Nevertheless, I agree a proactive approach is the only viable solution to the problem. If, after a time on *an ICS*, I feel someone is using software, I will not hesitate to report my suspicions. Thank you very much for the time and effort in composing your most informative letter.
37) Jan 1999 Hi there, firstly I'd like to thank you for your writings and efforts on cheaters on internet chess servers. I'd also like, quickly, to give you a few thoughts of my own. (...) I believe cheating will always be a problem, but we should all work to minimize it all the time.
38) 11:00 16-Jan-99 I read your web material on cheaters. As a **00, it's very disheartening to learn people actually do this. I really don't see how they can feel good about themselves if they do. But I don't see how it can be prevented as computers get better and more human like.
39) 12:17 22-Jan-99 From a GM: there are no names on your site.
40) 12:29 22-Jan-99 Interesting if somewhat soap-boxish article on (C), I agree with everything you said. But the issue remains how to tell if a person is using a computer or not?? It seems awfully difficult to do, and if you accuse someone of doing it well if you are wrong it could cause this person harm. Could you suggest some ways to be sure some opponent who is rated 500 points below you isn't beating the pants off you because he is playing way above his average? As big as the problem is it would be ugly if it turned into a witch (Computer) hunt!
41) 22:01 23-Jan-99 I've put a note in my finger and want to thank you for all your hard work in this matter. Here's to a better and more honest time playing on *an ICS*. :-)
42) Sun Jan 24 11:55:41 Great web site. I hope for more info from you. *an ICS* and all of us are greatful for all your efforts. (...) I am a *an ICS* member and would be greatful if you could tell me where on *an ICS* I can get the answers to the questions you pose in your web article. It would be nice if you included that in your article.
43) Sun Jan 24 17:58:00 I've read you article on computer cheating. While agreeing wholeheartedly with your position, I didn't see the relevance to my own situation (my rating bounces between **00 to **00). (...) But now, I've stumbled upon another damage caused by an environment where cheating flourishes. I was involved in a game with a gentleman playing under the name *censored handle* (my own handle is *censored handle*). I played well, although not exceptionally well. Upon initiating a mating attack, of which I was rather proud, he resigned with the statement that I was clearly using a computer. This kind of attack is very hurtful; not to mention difficult to defend against. I saved the game and would have asked him, if he thought I cheated, to report me to *an ICS*. Of course, I cannot do this because he has censored me. Incidentally, as this was this individual''s first standard game, I did not gain (and would not have lost) any rating points! I've worked very hard to get where I can defeat those in the **00 to **00 class and give **00-**00 rated players a good run for their money. This kind of accusation is depressing. Therefore, I urge you to keep fighting against computer cheats. But also, I would like to seek some method for fighting an accusation like this, some place to submit such a dispute. Because I cannot do so, I've left with the fear that this *censored handle* is going to slander me. While I've enjoyed *an ICS*, who needs this kind of crap? Anyway, good luck on your fight against computer cheating. In my opinion, the damage it does to the Internet Chess Community includes the kind of baseless accusations, which I have now experienced.
44) Wed Jan 27 19:13:16 A link to your site has been added at *censored web chess site*. Your page does a nice job of addressing what is likely to become an even larger problem over the coming years.
45) Wed Jan 27 19:32:16 Hi Doc! Just caught your web page. I too believe *an ICS* should be more
active in restricting unannounced computer usage and hope your campaign is working. However I think
your page could use some balance on two points:
1. Cheaters damage themselves - they are hurting their own OTB ability drastically. And what are
they achieving? Fooling themselves into believing they can play at a given rating? Sort of like
buying Playboy because you can't get a date.
2. Unjustified suspicion is also rampant. I have often been accused of computer usage after winning
a silly game (in which I hung a piece or two even) which offers no such proof. Accusing anyone who
beats you of cheating is not acceptable behavior (despite Mr. Kasparov's example).
Another topic: computer usage OTB. How can this be controlled? (...)
46) 04:50 29-Jan-99 I sent a message to *an ICS* admin concerning my game with *censored handle*
and (...). He has beaten way too many strong players with a fabulous record and even whips computers
that are very high rated.
February 99
47) 09:55 05-Feb-99 I recently got a (C) rewarded... and trying to figure out what exactly happened, I discovered your site. But nowhere do I find any mention on how exactly to punish (C)heaters...this is, I believe a very serious matter that needs to be discussed. (...) I really would like to start a discussion over this, I look for people who hate cheaters, but still, have an open mind.
48) 11:04 08-Feb-99 Hey, thanks for talking with me the other day. I put that little note in my finger and many people have asked about the articles on the web!
49) Tue Feb 9 10:09:02 I liked your cheaters page; I have found this a severe problem since I like to play a lot of * 0. Please see what I have to say: fi *censored handle*
50) 17:16 13-Feb-99 I have played chess about 25 years and there is one thing I am sure of. I have never met a ** year-old who is so good in blitz or bullet and can *censored* and chat during the game.
51) 10:13 14-Feb-99 I read your web page. I didn't realize the problem was as bad as you said, I hope you have more success catching (C)Heaters!!
52) 04:43 24-Feb-99 I read everything on your page. In cases where I've dealt with people who were later found out to be computers, I was suprised that I had done so well. That I was able to go for as many moves as I did vs. the likes of a *chess program* or *chess program* etc.
53) Wed Feb 24 06:06:14 Dear sir, I really enjoyed reading your article in geocities on the above topic, you must have spent a lot of time preparing it. I have a question to ask you, if I may. The question is which ICS do you think has the best safeguards against cheaters (computer program users)?
54) Wed Feb 24 11:18:31 DrUnclear: I am a fairly new member of *an ICS* and I have been playing * 0 rated games most of the time. I recently tried * 0, a time control that I can't seem to get a handle on, and I have done poorly. I am now thinking of joining a tourney that has a longer time control, like * 0 minutes each, and that is why I read your webpage on cheating. It's a good thing you've created there.
55) 10:33 27-Feb-99 Thanks for writing that informative article on
cheating. It was however completely depressing. I joined *an ICS* because I thought all the
buttheads were on the other ICSes.
March 99
56) Mon Mar 22 20:06:15 Read your page on (C)heating and just wanted to write and tell you that I appreciate the stand you have taken. I am aware that cheating does occur on *an ICS* but proving it seems to be the burden. Overall, I can only recall a couple of times when I think someone was using a computer. To me the tell tell sign was his playing ability in comparison of his rating. I wish you continued success in your endeavors and give you my full support.
57) Sat Mar 27 04:07:50 It has been said that in future many chess software like *chess program*, *chess program*, *chess program* would also connect to chess servers. Unfortunately, this function would lead to serious abuse on chess servers. Cheating liars would use this to abuse honest players on chess servers. (...) I would also encourage *an ICS* to ban such commercial interfaces (...).
58) Sat Mar 27 22:08:02 Hi, I just finished reading your expose on cheating and I must say that I
feel the same as you concerning this matter. And though I am a member of *an ICS*, I rarely play on
it just for this reason (...). Of the games I have played on line, I do not think that I have been
cheated, but here, it's just a matter of time before it occurs.
April 99
59) Fri Apr 2 00:57:21 Hi my name is *censored* from Sweden and play chess for a chessclub in *censored town*. (...) I occasionally play chess at various chess sites and I have to agree with you in this matter. The cheating sucks, you try and try to get a rating that does you right. But you never get there because of all the players that cheat! I'm also a member of the SSDF organisation and I have tested lots of chess programs over the years, when you do this you get a feeling for how a computer plays chess. And due to this I have to say there are a lot of them on the servers. And as a chesslover I think it stinks, that the ethics are not followed. I feel exactly the same as you do. I wish you well in your quest.
60) Fri Apr 02 10:11:42 This cheating has got to stop. It makes me only want to play at tournaments and even there I'm starting to get skeptical as people leave the board for 15 and 20 minutes at a time. What can be done? I wish there never was a computer chess program ever made!!!
61) Sat Apr 10 14:26:09 Dear Dr.Unclear: Your site has cleared up some mysterious encounters that I have had on *an ICS* For example: I played a guy last night, who had a **00 chess rating, yet only he had time lag---but not me. I'm no GM myself...my chess rating is in the upper **00s, but my opponent played much stronger than his rating. I barely beat him, only through time.
62) Sun Apr 11 23:53:27 Hi DrUnclear, I read your essay on your homepage and I have to say that I'm rather impressed by the comprehensiveness you dealt with that matter. As the development in the internet goes along, the problem you pointed out seems even to increase. Nowadays net tournaments get more and more popular (...).
63) Wed Apr 14 09:22:39 Hello, your site is very impressive concerning the cheater/cheating stuff! IMHO the only way to get rid of cheaters is (...) The 'punishment' should be graded from banned for one...several days to exclusion (rating reset is also an idea)... depending on their BIGPOINTS, also cheaters should have a chance to contemplate and learn! The other way is very 'painful' as I learned by myself on *an ICS*: two 'anticheater police men' told me one day while playing against *censored handle*... about 99.5% computer granted moves against me :((( ... several days I had no lust anymore to play chess, cause I thought chess is the game of fairness (I played about 20 years 'real/face to face')! By the way that person had many other cheating fellows on *an ICS*... but I get soon crazy to yell again and again against them in public (shout) - the response from the other 'public' is sometimes neither funny, so I wait for another solution (see above). I play chess for fun and every game argueing 'My opponent might be a cheater' kills the enjoyment very soon!
64) Sun Apr 18 05:41:44 I enjoyed your page. I recently quit
playing chess on *an ICS*, *an ICS* and *an ICS* due to cheaters. (...) I finally became fed up with
all the cheaters on the internet. (...) Might as well play a computer at home. (...)
I think anyone with a rating of over 2000 should have to endure pop quizes about chess by sys admins
in real time over the internet periodically, lol. Hey nice page.
May 99
65) Tue May 4 12:52:20 Dear DrUnclear: I've read much of your site. (...) I think you underestimate the extent of cheating in the lower levels and way overestimate it in the upper levels. (...) Cheating is more common in lower levels because those people are learning and will use chess programs to help them understand positions. (...) Also, I've run into several players who will play like Kasparov, then several moves short of thoroughly trashing me, resign! I guess pangs of conscience set in. Furthermore, people with federation ratings strongly tend to be more reliable, in my view. Most of the stronger players have a large investment in their chess learning and are more interested in the integrity of the game. Also, stronger players have the following qualities: (...) When I play someone I haven't played before, I check their finger after the game. If the game "felt" suspicious, I put their name on a notepad. Next time I play them, I again check their finger. If they were just new and now have 50 lightning/bullet games with many wins, I don't put them on the list, despite my suspicions. Otherwise, I give them one more chance. (...) To my knowledge, no programs generate moves for wild, bughouse, or suicide/losers. Thus wins in those categories gives most players a thumbs up. Moving back to percentages of players cheating, I think in under **00 players, that 10-20% of players use some form of cheating. This is based upon thousands of games and a long list of people I've censored. (...) I often will ask suspected cheaters a series of questions (...) I ask them their name, and the chess club they play for. They rarely give it. (Several years ago, in an usual position, I played the only brilliant move of my life, making a queen sacrifice, then checking with the knight to win the opponent's queen and then a rook. The poor fellow felt certain I was cheating. I told him my name, that I was then President of my local chess club, had a USCF rating, and that if he knew me, he'd know I was unlikely to cheat. We went on to discuss the game, and I believe it was printed in our club newsletter.) (...)*An ICS* is afraid to implement stricter controls of cheating because (...) Don't expect much in the way of progress. The problem will continue to get worse for the reasons you suggest.
66) Sat May 15 23:28:30 Hello Dr! I have read your page and I've liked it very much. Fabulous! You describe so well how do cheaters act and how to find out if someone is cheating on you... these were lessons I had to find out the worst way (...) . I'd just like to complain about a point: you often describe cheaters as low-rating people. This may lead to an erroneous conclusion. People may think all low-rating people are cheaters, or tend to cheat. No it isn't that way, there are people who know they are not chessmasters but they are there to play and they have lots of fun no matter their ratings.
67) Thu May 20 08:49:57 Hello! I read your cheatpage and you were right: it is a MUST read. I
like that you explain the results of cheating and results for averageJoe. I will add something in my
fi-notes about your page.
Sincerely
68) Tue May 25 19:26:50 Your efforts to expose computer cheats are admirable and I support you.
From your website I would say you are not only better informed but more even handed than I would be.
I sincerely hope that computer cheating never becomes undetectable.
We could get to the point where members would have to be interviewed and certified as NONcheaters; a
horribly expensive thing to contemplate. Internet chess could probably
not carry on if it came to that. I'll put a line in my notes at *an ICS* to denounce
cheaters (not that they care) and refer people to your page.
Regards
69) Wed May 26 20:17:35 Overall I found your thinking cogent and your efforts admirable.(...) Your efforts are applauded by many. I'm sure the Admins at *an ICS* and other sites are glad you're there. I think that they have adopted a more low profile approach in their opposition to cheats but their convictions must match yours closely. How could it be otherwise? Their business is at stake.
70) Thu May 27 00:38:30 After re-reading you website on computer cheaters I have the following
comments to 'discuss' :
(...) 4. As my chess in improving, and my ratings are going up and up (well not up and up and up,
but steadly increasing) I start to become paranoid that I'll be accused of cheating! (Which I do
not, nor will not, nor have I ever contemplated). However on playing wild bullet/lightning etc at
least I know I'm safe :). Seriously this problem, just by its
existence could well destroy a large part of the pleasure of learning and playing chess.
Now being able to beat players like *censored handle*/*censored handle* in simuls (not all the
time), and **00 players in blitz, then losing to **00 rated players I begin to wonder more and more
(part of the problem is I play slightly erratically, but not that erratic!). The
longer I play on the internet the more questions appear, which apparently, at least on *an ICS*, no
open forum exists, and which the admins dislike talking about!
5. Again thanks for all the time you must put into this problem!
Thanks again!
71) Fri May 28 16:04:27 I was aware of a cheater (MemberX) on *an ICS* for a long time (since
nov. 1998). My reasoning for not denouncing him was: why would MemberX be so annoyed if I make a
report on him? It was reading your homepage that made me feel guilty about doing nothing (not
reporting him). So I reported this character to *an ICS* authorities via an email on march 20th 1999
and later on followed with messages and ... nothing happened. I think they didn't give a shit about
my report and complaints.
I think your part #8 ("The pilot's perspective") of your
"Cheating on ICSes" homepage
describes really well the mind of a cheater, namely that MemberX character. This guy is a complete
jerk. In real life too. You're absolutely right on your part #8. This guy is totally
like that. This guy is a megalomaniac. He cheats in everything. He wants to be somebody in chess but
doesn't have the ability. He plays by e-mail and it won't surprise me if he gets the IM title in
postal. He's a laughing stock in my country but he also fools some people. He has a home page about
chess. He analyses games from the national championships for instance and publishes them on his web
site. His annotations are hilarious. He cheats on his web counter, cheats in analysis, cheats
everwhere he can. Maybe I should have talked to the other *an ICS* members living in my town about
this character and make them complain too... As for detailing furthermore the activities of this
joker on *an ICS*, I don't have the patience to do it anymore.
Best regards
June 99
72) Fri Jun 11 19:17:32 I know that's right-------thx for the info and putting out the word that
*an ICS* is full of cheaters-----I was being hammered by a player named *censored handle* on *an
ICS* and he was caught cheating--------he stole at least 100 rating rating points from me and made
me question my abilities-----the admins made him put a "I'm sorry I cheated" in his finger
notes-----what a joke----
peace DrUnclear
July 99
73) Fri Jul 2 22:08:21 By happenstance today, I saw an admin referring (on a question) to your
page and address. By curiosity I looked it up. WELL DONE! Not the least your analysis of the
cheaters psychological trigger mechanism.
I am an harmonious, flegmatic kind of person, but in my opinion a
cheater - only once - should be kicked out for lifetime. Even if I understand the
counter arguments. (Some countries have death penalty for pushing drugs. It helps.)
I remember a very humiliating game. My standard rating is around **00 and *an ICS* member for some 6
months. The opponent wanted early to know my age (typical question for young people, and unpolite
unless he says something like my age is xx, what is yours?).
My age is **. (Previously Vice President in a major international company - I have seen much
cheating in business.) Constantly kibitzing with a number of friends/onlookers. Handling complicated
tactical situations with ease + exclamations like "Gee, I am a pawn up", "Now I am 2
pawns up!", "A piece up for me now!", "I think you have to resign soon..."
And winning was a piece of cake. Don't remember his rating - below 2000. The consistence and ease of
his play was not "human". Difficult strategical/tactical situations in this game should
demand an extraordinary level of concentration from his side. But he was just playing and
kibitzing/telling. I went to bed like a fool.
My memory can play me a trick now - but I think his handle was *censored handle*. I will follow your
advices and submit this and other games of his a scrutiny in cooperation with my friend *censored
handle*.
You don't have to answer this - just hang in there! Thank you for your serious endeavours and for
the time you have chosen to invest in the subject.
74) Wed Jul 14 08:36:48 (...) There were a few other typos but I don't want to appear as being
picky since the typos do not ruin otherwise some well written and thought provoking articles.
I also thought it was interesting that you posted the point of view from the other side. It creates
a balanced point of view although however a cheater wishes to rationalize their style of playing,
they are still cheating and they should realize that honest players do not wish to play a cheater.
If they wanted to play a computer, they could have just played their own computer at home. Again,
thanks for the well written articles. Would it be ok to link to your web page from mine?
August 99
75) Sat Aug 07 20:39:05 I haven't seen you at ICC for some time and I remember reading something
in your notes about how you had chosen to play on another server which you prefer. While it would be
ungracious to complain about you playing where you are comfortable, I think we have lost some
security at ICC because of it. Lacking your scrutiny cheaters will now grow bolder.
I put a line in my finger notes concerning your website for several weeks. (...) Occasionally while
that line was in there, I would get responses from people who knew of you or had talked to you etc.
A common view was that you were a fanatic and one or two even used terms like wacko but even these
admitted that you were correct in your assessment of the problem. Two or three times a week I visit
with *censored handle* about different things and he has a high opinion of you. This is as good a
recommendation as anyone needs.
76) Mon Aug 9 02:57:36 Hello I have just read your page. I am saddened that you have left ICC and
hope you will return. I have left and came back myself for different reasons. (...) I think if you
stay away in a sense you are allowing the cheaters to really beat you. On the server all they can do is cheat; they can't really win.
I would like to also point out that the reason I got to your web page was because I wondered who is
the guy in all these peoples notes and why do they miss him?
I personally have caught and accused two cheaters this week and funny as it may seem I think it was the most pleasurable experience of chess. You see, it takes a strong player or at least one who can really appreciate the game to realize there is a cheater. The subtle differences that take place, it is an art really in itself! Well one guy left immediately never to return and another seems to be playing advanced chess now :-) but he knows and that will take some of his satisfaction away perhaps.
(...) The cheaters will always be there I think and it will be a constant battle and one that I
take pleasure in winning once in a while, I hope you will return to catch a few more and of course
more importantly to enjoy the game and the company of the other players.
P.S. As a side note I played some correspondence games with computer assistance which I made clear
to my opponents. Although I learned a lot from this, I didn't enjoy the games as much. I also played
against a computer without the use of assistance and was able to win one game although I got
hammered in another. Even though I got hammered, I found some beautiful ideas I didn't get to play
but nevertheless were pleasing to find. When you use a computer, you miss a lot of these things and
the cheaters in the ICC instance miss it all.
Cheers and take care
77) Sat Aug 21 12:36:02 Dr! Following is my recollection of the events that occurred in a LA tournament. I was not there, and only heard about it from several players about a year after it occurred. In other words - the story is true -
This occurred about 6 years ago, in Southern California, right around the time computer chess programs were getting very strong. In the past it was common to see a player or two wearing headsets while playing OTB games. We all assumed this was to avoid distractions and perhaps calm nerves by listening to music or something. A player no one had ever heard of or seen before entered the expert section (maybe open - don't recall) and won the section. He was wearing a headset during the games, and (...) were noticeably strange to his opponents. The TD was suspicious (probably because of opponents complaints), and told the individual that he would award the prize money on the condition he play a single 5 minute blitz game with the TD. Win or lose the TD said he would then pay the prize money to him. The individual never played the blitz game, he disappeared never to be seen again. I assume the prize money went to the next best performer in that tournament.
78) Mon Aug 23 13:52:09 Hello DrUnclear,
Thanks for your e-mail. I hope you don't expect a comprehensive detailed opinion, as detailed as your assay! (Re: Part # 8: The pilot's perspective)
I read it carefully and I must admit that you hadn't missed any point. You had gone through all the possible psychological intentions of the (C)heaters, explaining the psychodynamic aspect of this unpleasant habit. It shows that you had thought and studied a lot about this phenomenon and managed to give a very good account of what is going through a cheater's mind, consciously or subconsciously. Your sense of humor is also admirable.
First time we talked about this issue, you mentioned some of your friends believed you were obsessed about it. To my mind, one can not judge on just an assay written by someone and say this person has obsessive compulsive disorder. If chess, particularly playing on websites, is the person's main hobby, I can understand why he may care a lot about it. Bearing in mind the fact that nobody else has efficiently complained about it, one may understandably get worried that this issue is being totally unattended.
So I couldn't find enough evidence indicating that the author of the assay has OCD. If there is only one homepage highlighting the adverse impacts of cheating on internet chess sites, it should be as comprehensive and convincing as possible.
I hope this brief message has given some feedback, mainly as a chess player's view, and to some extent as a junior psychiatrist's. Yours,
September 99
79) Thu Sep 9 17:17:47 Hi Doc! Here's my recollection of an encounter I had with a cheater some time ago.
I had put out a seek for a 15 0 game and I was matched by *censored handle*. I was White and the game began 1.e4 e6 2.d4 ... a French. After approx. 15 minutes of play, I was definitely losing, down 2-3 pawns and poorly coordinated. As I recall, I had 5-6 minutes left on my clock when my opponent sent me this message: "Resign.". That was irritating but I ignored him and focused on the position. Another two minutes passed and I had not moved, when another message appeared: "*censored handle* says: Resign. *Censored program* gives -5 in this position." I was flabbergasted and typed: "You're using a chess program?" His reply?... "No. I just know what *censored program* would evaluate this position." I was angry and replied: "Bull!", and I resigned immediately. (...) I reported him to *censored admin* and received a message that *censored handle* had been warned. No (C) label was ever attached to *censored handle* that I am aware of and I never played him again.
I guess (C)heats not only suffer from low self-esteem, lack of courage, and ego-mania; but also, intellectual underdevelopment! How dumb can a person be to play on *an ICS*, to have their chess program play for them and even to 'confess' without realizing it.
80) Mon Sep 13 06:41:48 Hello Doc, I've read your whole homepage and I enjoyed it a lot.
I started playing chess on the web when CM Online (Chessmaster Online) went online back in 96 and Case's Ladder became a popular way of measuring player strength since there were no ratings on CM Online, only names. The top players became aware quickly that to avoid being cheated by computer programs they had to resort to 1-2 min games; this change occured almost overnight and forever affected the way chess was played on the net. It seemed every possible excuse was invented the first week of this change by the players guilty of computer abuse:
- I have arthritis
- mouse is no good
- lightning is not "real" chess
- it's a mouse race
- I'm old and slow
- I don't think that quick
- I have nothing to prove
There were many others but the top players did not buy the lines they were being fed: they knew when they were being cheated. (...)
Now, if anyone needs proof of how devastating lying cheaters/computer abusers can be to a chess server, one only needs to look at VOG; once a fine server full of players displaced by the demise of ChessMaster Live, it quickly became a killing ground for fragile chess egos at the hands of computer cheats. System admins were helpless as 25-30% of all the top players were computer cheats and when confronted with clear evidence of a player cheating would respond (...). Cheaters almost killed the site: it did not take long for human players to leave. VOG used to have an average of 100 players online all the time. Go there now and witness 30-40 players with an average rating of about 1600; it's the ghost town of chess servers!
Well you would think this taught the other servers a lesson in how serious these computer cheats really are but you would be wrong! I myself caught 2 cheaters on *an ICS* in less than 1 hour and was not looking for cheats, just watching what I thought were 2 strong players, but turned out to be cheats right there in plain view of anyone who cared to watch. An admin dealt with my reports and they were both identified...but what if I had not said something? Other people would have been these low-lifes next victims.
Cheaters don't care! Cheaters don't care that some bright kid may get crushed by a cheater thus destroying what may have been the next Fischer, but now he gave it up for Quake III. Kids play in what they can see improvement - but will abandon a skill if it seems they do not have a chance. There is no greater crime then to crush a young mind and the delicate ego before it blossoms!
Maybe I should tell you of the computer abuser who was caught on CM Live cheating by the players, he then moved on to *ICS2* and then to *ICS3* where he was banned (both ICSes) after months of computer abuse, and now you might ask yourself where did this low-life go? Well he became an (...) on *ICS4*!! (...) but since no one from *ICS4* bothered to communicate with the other servers, he goes on to *ICS4* (...). I was shocked to be honest - almost left *ICS4* because of this - but thought it was not worth it.
(...)
So now I tell you, these chess servers need to (...) or internet chess is doomed to 1-2 min. time controls to avoid the onslaught of faster computers, faster chess programs and (...). I predict that the chess server who will lick this problem will go on to rule the internet chess scene! For no one will want to play anywhere else, but the cheats...
81) Thu Sep 16 12:49:29 Hello there.
I have had a big problem with *an ICS* not caring about w17/Losers/Suicide chess cheats. I know of at least * that do cheat, they are (...). I have games (...) found complicated combinations in a matter of seconds. Which NO human could find in that time. I have been playing w17/Losers/Suicide chess for almost 2 years and have played all of the greats many times. (...) How *an ICS* can not say this player is cheating is beyond me. How anyone can find a complicated combo in *-* seconds then play the rest of the moves with (...) is beyond me (and the rest of mankind I believe). To this date I do not know of anything who has been busted for cheating in w17/Losers/Suicide chess. I am not the only person who feels this way. I like your fi notes and web-site. Keep up the good work.
By the way, *an ICS* lied on question 5. Many computer cheats have been caught more than once and have had the (C) taken away after (...). (...)
October 99
82) Tue Oct 12 00:19:59 Hello DrUnclear ,
Once I witnessed (C)heating in a team OTB chess tournament. This happened in a regional team
competition in Switzerland in a lower class of the Swiss league in 1996-1997. On one board, after a
couple of moves, an interesting and complicated situation arose on the board. The position was still
theoretical but none of the players was aware of it. One player suddenly had to go to the bathroom,
came back and found on his own the correct continuation. Then, 3 moves later, he needed to go again
to the bathroom; this surely releaved him because he found a difficult tactical blow, way above his
level. Our team captain found that suspicious that this player after every "pause" played
that well, so he decided to discretly follow the player to the bathroom. What a strange noise he
discovered, the first human beeping when pissing (...). Both team captains had an animated
discussion about this incident and "gentle" words were exchanged. Finaly they agreed to
call the game a draw, which brought victory to our team.
Nothing concrete was ever discovered, only very good play for a low rated player beeping while in the bathroom. A draw was proposed and accepted when our team captain tried to clarify the situation; this draw offer was accepted in exchange for not making any complaint nor accusation to the Chess League authorities.
83) Tue Oct 19 14:48:05 Hello Doc,
I have seen a great deal of cheating at VOG chess server and other internet chess servers. Once I was playing someone in a lightning game and that player made moves without losing much time. I lost the game on time under suspicious circumstances. (...)
Another incident involved a prominent player who used a computer at VOG. He used the typical excuses as to why he didn't play any lightning game. Anyways, a new player who was very strong, maybe a master, came and just destroyed him over the board. He knew how to beat computers, what strategy to use etc... He helped prove he was a cheater and helped clean up some of the scum around there.
At least 4 cheaters were banned from VOG this year.
November 99
84) Sat Nov 06 20:31:36 I wonder how much affect cheaters have on our ratings. Would we be higher rated in a real club? I suspect a lot of people cheat, especially when you are playing a very low rated player and they play better than a lot of the higher rated players. If you think of all the ways they can cheat it's amazing that people still play on the net. (...) I think the higher the rating the fewer the cheaters, what do you think?
85) Mon Nov 22 10:37:15 Why did you replace ratings and time controls with ***s, it is a part of
the information and will not disclose the sender.
Regarding cheaters: I think you are right, but you're exaggerating everything a bit. Yes, it is a
problem, but 95%-97% of the players are honest. I play mostly standard games and have so far seen
just several cheaters in my games.
I think rating points are meaningless, especially on an ICS. If I see my opponent is cheating, I
just treat this game as if I played a computer (I enjoy playing computers, sometimes even beating
them, because they like to leave the king in the center in exchange for a pawn or two), and don't
get too excited over it. I do report the player, but I don't see why we need to accuse or be mad at
those people, after all they are just hurting themselves, they are spending priceless time, doing
something that will never benefit them.
If you just had half the stuff you have on your page (the info on how to detect cheaters is good
info), not the insulting things, it would be better. No need to contribute to public paranoia.
Thanks for reading
86) Thu Nov 25 01:57:05 I enjoy your site. I gave up playing at Yahoo a year ago when I saw
terrible players hack their way to 50,000 point rankings! I usually play at Playsite Games (when it
isn't booting people off in its buggy program) as *censored handle*. You can tell I don't cheat by
my abyssmal ranking. At least it's all mine......
Keep up the good work.
87) Fri Nov 26 17:58:56 Yes I have been a victim of them. It seems that they change their handles
from time to time so that you can't keep up with them. This is frustrating for me and many others
making me want to give up playing this game on the internet. It is ashame that few people make it so
bad that it has come to this.
I just enjoy a good game with others my ranking and sometimes trying out higher ranked people at my
site. I joined Caissa's web about a year ago and for the most part it has been well suited for me
...except those times when i know that someone is cheating. As in life we all must endure the
cheating that goes on in our daily lives. I guess we just let it happen and just move on ...nothing
really we can do about the corruption in politics ...right? So I am being ambivalent about most
everything nowadays and just letting those who cheat alone and playing those who don't also. It was
good to see your advice but little can be done in reality. They just find another way of taking
advantage of the system. (...) I am known as *censored handle* on that site.
Good luck to you, if you know of another chess site that lets Web TV onto it, please let me know. I
like to try out new sites.
Thanks
December 99
88) Tue Dec 28 1999 13:08:08 Dear DrUnclear,
I read your articles about the cheaters and I find it very interesting. I agree
with you, that this is a very serious problem for internet chess (and probably
OTB-chess too; do you know the case of Mr. Alwermann beating GM Kupreitschik in
a german open and announcing a mate in 8 (!) moves in a very complex position?
He was using Fritz with a little phone in his glasses and a second person who
submitted the moves. If he wouldn't have been so stupid to announce the mate,
maybe nobody would have noticed the cheat. Personally, I think that
chess-computers will be the death of the game sooner or later ... ). I play at
chess.net as *censored*, and I didn't had the feeling of beeing cheated by a
computer-user yet. But who knows? Anyway, I appreciate your quest very much and
I would like to ensure you my support and gratefullness.
Kind regards
*censored*
89) Wed Jan 5 2000 15:42:32 You caught me cheating last year on ICC and just wanted to thank you for that. Am back on the server after a year off and enjoying it much more. Am sorry to see you are not there to do the great job you were doing but understand your reasoning.
Best to you in the NewYear
*censored*
90) Tue Jan 11 2000 00:24:16 I'm playing on ICC with the handle '*censored*' and '*censored*'. Too bad you chose to leave this server. I fully understand your reasons though. May I ask under what ICS you play now, if any?
cu,
-*censored*
91) Wed Jan 19 2000 08:53:59 Yes I agree with almost everything you say about cheating on Yahoo online games. Recently to prevent cheating to a certain extent, tournaments in checkers and chess are played 1/0 to 2/0 respectively which almost all but eliminate cheaters from using programs. But then it takes the point out of a friendly games of chess or checkers.
February 2000
92) Tue Feb 22 2000 21:30:59 Hello Dr Unclear,
My name is *censored* and I'm an admin on *an ICS*. I fought and fight cheaters all over arround with good results. If I can help you in something, only let me know and go ahead with your great work.
Congratulations,
*censored*
March 2000
93) Wed Mar 8 2000 03:09:38 DrUnclear --
I visited your web site for the first time in a while
to make sure the link in my ICC finger notes still works.
The new "Part 11: Personal testimonials" is an excellent
addition. The words of the cheaters are much more
convincing than any amount of hypothetical speculation
(as in "The pilot's perspective"). I think the testimony
confirms my notion that, above all, (C)heaters are pitiful.
Imagine what it means to have so little going on in one's
life, and such a poor self-image, that it gives a feeling
of power and accomplishment to be the front-end to a
computer program. These flesh-and-blood BlitzIn 0.00's
really need to "get a life" in the most literal sense.
Your friend,
-- *censored*
94) Mon Mar 20 15:35:46 Hello, I was inspired to write to you by your articles on internet chess cheaters! Let me first start off by saying that I am in no way innocent.... having said that I would like to say that I am no longer a cheater. I guess the main reason is because after getting my rating up into the **00's I began noticing that I wasn't the only one cheating! I saw the telltale signs of cheating over and over again. I could no longer get my rating up by playing a lot of the players that were at my rating...
I would like to give you some of the signs that I think are main stays of a cheater. (...)
I am really ashamed that I was a cheater, I have stopped using my old screen name *censored* and if anyone has played that screen name, I am deeply sorry!
*censored*
EX-CHEATER!
95) Fri Apr 21 10:56:31
Hi DrUnclear-
Thank you for your nice site about ICS cheating. I am a player who came late to chess and have been enjoying learning it as an adult. I would like to tell you about something that I did once:
I like to try different interfaces on ICSes. I started doing this because I had a video refresh problem with Winboard. So I ended up downloading Slics, Freak, etc and trying them out, and keeping an eye out for new ones.
There is a program called *censored* from a *country* company (I don't remember exactly the URL). I downloaded it and liked its interface. The help files say it is also an "analysis tool" and it has a chess engine built in (!). There is a "hint" button you can use IN AN ICS GAME, and an "accept" button which will send the move directly to the server.
My USCF rating at the time was somewhere around 1300. I have a co-worker with whom I play OTB, he has a rating of 1880+. I told him about it and we logged onto FICS and played an unrated game, and I used *censored* and the "Hint/Accept" combination all the way. It destroyed him in a 1 0 or 2 0 game AND I DIDN'T EVEN HAVE TO LOOK AT THE BOARD.
I think a program like this is insidious. You could play a game and (...). It is more like chess with a computer -- though if your rating were really low it might be suspicious when you suddenly find a killer move.
Anyway, after this my friend and I decided that ICS cheating must be rampant, and we try not to care about our ratings. I play as rnbqkbnr on FICS, QueenDropper on Chess.Net and CaliphAlMaamun on Caissa.com.
I wonder whether cheating can cause a general suppression of the ratings of non-cheaters. My play has improved enourmously OTB in the last 2 yrs, but my ICS rating is locked around 900 (blitz).
I find it interesting that your site implies that cheating is more common on long games. Are there any statistics on this?
Regards,
*censored*
96) Fri Apr 21 20:17:01
Hi..Just commenting on your site, I thought it was very well put with a clear message to the admins at the various ICSes. It's good to know there are still people with good sense of fairplay, and the intelligence to do something about all of the cheaters that are out there.
*handle*(Chess.Net) *handle*(ICC)
97) Thu Apr 27 14:18:28
Thank you very much for your website and your finger notes (still available) on ICC. I've been on ICC for over a year now (*handle*). If somebody fingers me they see that I don't play a lot of games, and my ratings aren't good at all. I readily admit to anybody that I'm a patzer. I enjoy chatting over games, and would rather lose a well played game than win a poorly executed game.
The reality is, I don't have time to study a lot of chess, though I do when I have time. But I am still proud of my ratings, and being a chessplayer, as poor as they are. Why? Because they're mine. Sure, every humiliating loss is mine. But so is every win. And a win even against a low-rated (C)omputer like BabyBach is as satisfying to me as a win against Anand or Kasparov. In their souls, the best any (c)heater can hope for is the "solace" of an assisted win, if they're not truly psychotic.
The question is, how many of those humiliating losses were at the hands - or CPUs - of (C)heaters? How many times would I have had an honest win instead of a dishonest loss - or the opposite from the other player's perspective. ?
In the end, I don't think it's possible to stop. Even with the best software in the world, and the best analyzers, it seems to me that it would still be possible to (c)heat by having a handheld, tabletop, or another computer right next to your interface. But continuing to remind (c)heaters that they're not really playing chess is valuable in and of itself. Maybe it would help (I doubt it, but it'd be worth a try) to (...).
I would note that you don't seem to differentiate those who already use the (C) handle voluntarily, or commmend them for their honesty. Could you maybe put in a sentence that suggests that (C) players are valid, too, since they're being honest about it?
Thank you again for your site. It was really eye-opening.
*censored*
Connell, Wa.
(ICC handle: *handle*)
