lichess.org
Donate

getting timed out for no reason

hello everyone I played 9 rapid games in the last 48 hours and I just aborted the last one as my opponent's rating is provisional and players with low rating in bullet/blitz (without provisional and very high rapid rating which is provisional are more likely to use external assistance statistically
only one in a hundred players is a cheater normally and like 10 in a hundred are cheaters in the scenario I told
I am not accusing my opponent of anything but my point is why did I get timed out

hello everyone I played 9 rapid games in the last 48 hours and I just aborted the last one as my opponent's rating is provisional and players with low rating in bullet/blitz (without provisional and very high rapid rating which is provisional are more likely to use external assistance statistically only one in a hundred players is a cheater normally and like 10 in a hundred are cheaters in the scenario I told I am not accusing my opponent of anything but my point is why did I get timed out

"very high rapid rating which is provisional are more likely to use external assistance statistically"

Yet another Kramnik...

You absolutely deserved to get timed out. If I was a moderator I would have done more.

"very high rapid rating which is provisional are more likely to use external assistance statistically" Yet another Kramnik... You absolutely deserved to get timed out. If I was a moderator I would have done more.

why did I get timed out

Don't know. You don't typically get timed out for aborting just one game.

Maybe you aborted multiple in the past week or something.

>why did I get timed out Don't know. You don't typically get timed out for aborting just one game. Maybe you aborted multiple in the past week or something.

@IamNOTamod said ^

"very high rapid rating which is provisional are more likely to use external assistance statistically"

Yet another Kramnik...

But they are saying this after it happened. They didn't say they accused their opponent of cheating during the game.

You absolutely deserved to get timed out. If I was a moderator I would have done more.

Based on what they said, they aborted one game.

You don't typically get timed out for aborting one game.

@IamNOTamod said [^](/forum/redirect/post/ynhGHdUv) > "very high rapid rating which is provisional are more likely to use external assistance statistically" > > Yet another Kramnik... But they are saying this after it happened. They didn't say they accused their opponent of cheating during the game. > You absolutely deserved to get timed out. If I was a moderator I would have done more. Based on what they said, they aborted one game. You don't typically get timed out for aborting one game.

The OP aborted three games in the last 36 hours.

And I think I should elaborate on my earlier statement.

Firstly, is it more likely that the player mentioned is a cheater, or a player relatively new to slower-time controls who finds themselves better at those compared to fast chess?

Secondly, 1/100 and 10/100 are imagined statistics without hard evidence (reports, studies, etc.). As far as I know, anyways.

Which brings me to the Kramnik reference. I strongly believe that the Kramniks of the world actively and consciously spread misinformation to serve their own agendas. I believe therefore that it is my duty to point out misinformation.

And by the way, anyone can visit the OPs profile, where they can view their aborted games, and deduce which user the OP is accusing. This counts as public shaming.

'Oh, but the OP stated they weren't accusing anyone of anything!"

Then why did they mention cheating and use it as a reason for game abortion?

The OP aborted three games in the last 36 hours. And I think I should elaborate on my earlier statement. Firstly, is it more likely that the player mentioned is a cheater, or a player relatively new to slower-time controls who finds themselves better at those compared to fast chess? Secondly, 1/100 and 10/100 are imagined statistics without hard evidence (reports, studies, etc.). As far as I know, anyways. Which brings me to the Kramnik reference. I strongly believe that the Kramniks of the world actively and consciously spread misinformation to serve their own agendas. I believe therefore that it is my duty to point out misinformation. And by the way, anyone can visit the OPs profile, where they can view their aborted games, and deduce which user the OP is accusing. This counts as public shaming. 'Oh, but the OP stated they weren't accusing anyone of anything!" Then why did they mention cheating and use it as a reason for game abortion?

@MAGNus_204 said ^

high rapid rating which is provisional are more likely to use external assistance statistically

I believe you do not understand what a provisional rating is. In the Glicko rating system, a player's Rating Deviation (RD) increases over time during periods of inactivity to reflect growing uncertainty about their current skill level. When your RD is over a certain amount the rating becomes provisional. The most likely cause for a provisional rating is the player simply playing different time controls.

This is why you're being compared to Kramnik since you are using a metric you don't understand and then applying it for a completely unrelated purpose to obtain results you have no statistical basis to justify. All your post does is fuel paranoia and disinformation while providing zero evidence.

@MAGNus_204 said [^](/forum/redirect/post/pMfhAFsk) > high rapid rating which is provisional are more likely to use external assistance statistically I believe you do not understand what a provisional rating is. In the Glicko rating system, a player's Rating Deviation (RD) increases over time during periods of inactivity to reflect growing uncertainty about their current skill level. When your RD is over a certain amount the rating becomes provisional. The most likely cause for a provisional rating is the player simply playing different time controls. This is why you're being compared to Kramnik since you are using a metric you don't understand and then applying it for a completely unrelated purpose to obtain results you have no statistical basis to justify. All your post does is fuel paranoia and disinformation while providing zero evidence.

but I dont suspect anything on my opponent
all I did is just abort one singular rapid game in 48 hours out of 9
and I got timed out

@IamNOTamod please explain how did I abort 3 games

anyone know why did that happen?

but I dont suspect anything on my opponent all I did is just abort one singular rapid game in 48 hours out of 9 and I got timed out @IamNOTamod please explain how did I abort 3 games anyone know why did that happen?

"I dont suspect anything on my opponent"

And yet you wrote "I just aborted the last one as my opponent's rating is provisional and players with low rating in bullet/blitz (without provisional and very high rapid rating which is provisional are more likely to use external assistance statistically".

"explain how did I abort 3 games"

How would I know how you aborted the games?

"I dont suspect anything on my opponent" And yet you wrote "I just aborted the last one as my opponent's rating is provisional and players with low rating in bullet/blitz (without provisional and very high rapid rating which is provisional are more likely to use external assistance statistically". "explain how did I abort 3 games" How would I know how you aborted the games?

@IamNOTamod said ^

The OP aborted three games in the last 36 hours.

And I think I should elaborate on my earlier statement.

Firstly, is it more likely that the player mentioned is a cheater, or a player relatively new to slower-time controls who finds themselves better at those compared to fast chess?

Secondly, 1/100 and 10/100 are imagined statistics without hard evidence (reports, studies, etc.). As far as I kn...

please read your first line and explain how did i abort 3 games

@IamNOTamod said [^](/forum/redirect/post/fq9y3LkF) > The OP aborted three games in the last 36 hours. > > And I think I should elaborate on my earlier statement. > > Firstly, is it more likely that the player mentioned is a cheater, or a player relatively new to slower-time controls who finds themselves better at those compared to fast chess? > > Secondly, 1/100 and 10/100 are imagined statistics without hard evidence (reports, studies, etc.). As far as I kn... please read your first line and explain how did i abort 3 games

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.