lichess.org
Donate

The Elephant in the Room

I don't even see why so many people would want to cheat online. I get it when there's a cash prize, but a lot of cheaters aren't there for that. They just-cheat.

I don't even see why so many people would want to cheat online. I get it when there's a cash prize, but a lot of cheaters aren't there for that. They just-cheat.

While the problem of cheating is indeed quite acute, it's important to keep the chesscom and their so-called (self-proclaimed) "experts" away from any official solution to that. It's even more important to remember that chesscom is an enterprise aiming at making money, and their interest in fair and professional chess is situational. In that regard, any discussion on anti-cheating measures in offline tournaments should kick off with a clear statement about the ample differences between online and offline chess, thus emphasizing the irrelevance of any measures undertaken by chesscom or other private online services for the real (= offline) chess competitions.

While the problem of cheating is indeed quite acute, it's important to keep the chesscom and their so-called (self-proclaimed) "experts" away from any official solution to that. It's even more important to remember that chesscom is an enterprise aiming at making money, and their interest in fair and professional chess is situational. In that regard, any discussion on anti-cheating measures in offline tournaments should kick off with a clear statement about the ample differences between online and offline chess, thus emphasizing the irrelevance of any measures undertaken by chesscom or other private online services for the real (= offline) chess competitions.

the problem on this "cheating" issue was sometimes, for what reason, we humans somehow activate our inner bot. that our intuition matches on the system algorithm, which is unfair to those people who is starting to learn how to play chess. I mean all of us has this "lucky day" right?

the problem on this "cheating" issue was sometimes, for what reason, we humans somehow activate our inner bot. that our intuition matches on the system algorithm, which is unfair to those people who is starting to learn how to play chess. I mean all of us has this "lucky day" right?

Magnus Resign In Move 2?? Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?!?!?!

Magnus Resign In Move 2?? Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?!?!?!

Cheating of any kind, in any arena, by a player who's old enough to thoroughly understand that cheating is wrong needs to be met with a 0 tolerance policy by FIDE. That means that as soon as it can be confirmed beyond reasonable doubt that a player has blatantly cheated online or elsewhere, that player should be permanently barred from competing in any FIDE event. This is the only solution.

It's simply not fair for other players to have to wonder if their opponent who has cheated before is still willing to cheat to win. That's why I think Carlsen is completely justified in his reaction regardless of whether or not Niemann cheated over the board. No one accidentally cheats or cheats without knowing what they're doing is wrong. There's never any mitigating factor or justification for cheating. You don't cheat then realize later that cheating is wrong and become a changed man. If you cheat, there's something wrong with your moral compass that makes you feel entitled to victimize someone else for you benefit, even when there's no possible way to rationalize your actions.

If you think I'm being overly dramatic, or you think I need to put things in perspective and realize that cheating in chess isn't the worst crime in the world, that's understandable. But being able to play chess competitively isn't an unalienable right. Permanently ban confirmed cheaters. It is quite literally the only viable solution that's fair to people who don't cheat.

Cheating of any kind, in any arena, by a player who's old enough to thoroughly understand that cheating is wrong needs to be met with a 0 tolerance policy by FIDE. That means that as soon as it can be confirmed beyond reasonable doubt that a player has blatantly cheated online or elsewhere, that player should be permanently barred from competing in any FIDE event. This is the only solution. It's simply not fair for other players to have to wonder if their opponent who has cheated before is still willing to cheat to win. That's why I think Carlsen is completely justified in his reaction regardless of whether or not Niemann cheated over the board. No one accidentally cheats or cheats without knowing what they're doing is wrong. There's never any mitigating factor or justification for cheating. You don't cheat then realize later that cheating is wrong and become a changed man. If you cheat, there's something wrong with your moral compass that makes you feel entitled to victimize someone else for you benefit, even when there's no possible way to rationalize your actions. If you think I'm being overly dramatic, or you think I need to put things in perspective and realize that cheating in chess isn't the worst crime in the world, that's understandable. But being able to play chess competitively isn't an unalienable right. Permanently ban confirmed cheaters. It is quite literally the only viable solution that's fair to people who don't cheat.

so did Niemann cheat or not?

so did Niemann cheat or not?

@Wumpi said in #15:

No one accidentally cheats or cheats without knowing what they're doing is wrong. There's never any mitigating factor or justification for cheating. You don't cheat then realize later that cheating is wrong and become a changed man. If you cheat, there's something wrong with your moral compass that makes you feel entitled to victimize someone else for you benefit, even when there's no possible way to rationalize your actions.

Is it possible to cheat, knowing that it is wrong, then later your moral compass changes (is "fixed", for lack of a better word)?

You conveniently leave this possibility out of your list, but if the answer to my question is "yes" then your argument falls apart.

@Wumpi said in #15: > No one accidentally cheats or cheats without knowing what they're doing is wrong. There's never any mitigating factor or justification for cheating. You don't cheat then realize later that cheating is wrong and become a changed man. If you cheat, there's something wrong with your moral compass that makes you feel entitled to victimize someone else for you benefit, even when there's no possible way to rationalize your actions. Is it possible to cheat, knowing that it is wrong, then later your moral compass changes (is "fixed", for lack of a better word)? You conveniently leave this possibility out of your list, but if the answer to my question is "yes" then your argument falls apart.

The problem is that there are two types of chess, OTB and online, with nothing in between.

There needs to be that in-between that lets players from around the world compete whilst remaining close to their own location, but not necessarily playing in their own home.

i.e. "hybrid" chess whereby one plays on a computer but at a venue with all the security measures in place.

The problem is that there are two types of chess, OTB and online, with nothing in between. There needs to be that in-between that lets players from around the world compete whilst remaining close to their own location, but not necessarily playing in their own home. i.e. "hybrid" chess whereby one plays on a computer but at a venue with all the security measures in place.