Alledged cheating on LiChess

[hgm]

Let me see if I understand this:

There are techniques to obtain higher rating on servers like LiChess than you really are worth, known as 'farming'. Eduard accused you of using these techniquess to reach first place on the LiChess rating list. You say this is a false accusation, because Eduard did it himself as well.

Right so far?

[AlexChess]

Let me see if I understand this:

There are techniques to obtain higher rating on servers like LiChess than you really are worth, known as 'farming'. Eduard accused you of using these techniquess to reach first place on the LiChess rating list. You say this is a false accusation, because Eduard did it himself as well.

Right so far?

TRUE I was playing ALSO against original bots:
1. To build my opening books based on won games (anyway Admete_bot has 2450 ELO IM-GM level)
2. To play my personal challenge while checking the DELTA between my engine and originals.

ACCUSES ARE ABOUT DOING NOTHING! BAD

Lichess.org admins or Original engines authors has NEVER complained about that, only the Leaderboard Team, a Lichess.org group strictly following their own rules has excluded my bots from their Ranking Lists (but they are still playing with me ) Lichess.org has a lot of chess variants: Racing Kings, Horde, King-of-the-Hill, Antichess, Atomic, Three-check. Probably admins consider my ELO RACE only one more variant.

Eduard is still doing the same https://lichess.org/@/Flying-Rebel farming like a devil with weak bots.



Now I'm bored by bullet challenges and I'm playing only against VERY TOP BOTS and long time games 25+0 (since I have verified that bullet games are useless for building books. You can watch my games LIVE

Please, ask him to focus on HIS topics, writing about HIS engines and HIS opening books.

[AndrewGrant]

HGM, please move this post to Computer Chess Club: Kindergarten

[hgm]

Why? Cheating is serious business!

[hgm]

Let me see if I understand this:

There are techniques to obtain higher rating on servers like LiChess than you really are worth, known as 'farming'. Eduard accused you of using these techniquess to reach first place on the LiChess rating list. You say this is a false accusation, because Eduard did it himself as well.

Right so far?

TRUE I was playing ALSO against original bots:
1. To build my opening books based on won games (anyway Admete_bot has 2450 ELO IM-GM level)
2. To play my personal challenge while checking the DELTA between my engine and originals.

ACCUSES ARE ABOUT DOING NOTHING! BAD

Lichess.org admins or Original engines authors has NEVER complained about that, only the Leaderboard Team, a Lichess.org group strictly following their own rules has excluded my bots from their Ranking Lists (but they are still playing with me ) Lichess.org has a lot of chess variants: Racing Kings, Horde, King-of-the-Hill, Antichess, Atomic, Three-check. Probably admins consider my ELO RACE only one more variant.

Eduard is still doing the same https://lichess.org/@/Flying-Rebel farming like a devil with weak bots.



Now I'm bored by bullet challenges and I'm playing only against VERY TOP BOTS and long time games 25+0 (since I have verified that bullet games are useless for building books. You can watch my games LIVE

Please, ask him to focus on HIS topics, writing about HIS engines and HIS opening books.

OK.

This reminds me a bit of the guy who complained his opponent was cheating him out of the deserved win, because he was perpetually checked. (Seriously! There are people like that on chess.com.)

So to resolve this matter once and for all:

Rating lists on LiChess are not supposed to reflect the strength of the players, because their method for calculating the 'ratings' is highly sensitive to the choice of opponent. This makes getting high on these lists a strategy game in itself that has nothing to do with Chess, with its own rules, which apparently allow you to exploit this to the max. Bot operators on LiChess play that game with enthusiasm.

As this all is allowed, it cannot be called 'cheating' anymore then checkmating an opponent who was a Queen ahead is "cheating him out of his deserved win". It would just be stupid to think a high ranking means a strong bot.

I think that should settle it,and it is useful that everyone now knows it.

[AlexChess]

OK.

This reminds me a bit of the guy who complained his opponent was cheating him out of the deserved win, because he was perpetually checked. (Seriously! There are people like that on chess.com.)

So to resolve this matter once and for all:

Rating lists on LiChess are not supposed to reflect the strength of the players, because their method for calculating the 'ratings' is highly sensitive to the choice of opponent. This makes getting high on these lists a strategy game in itself that has nothing to do with Chess, with its own rules, which apparently allow you to exploit this to the max. Bot operators on LiChess play that game with enthusiasm.

As this all is allowed, it cannot be called 'cheating' anymore then checkmating an opponent who was a Queen ahead is "cheating him out of his deserved win". It would just be stupid to think a high ranking means a strong bot.

I think that should settle it,and it is useful that everyone now knows it.

Thanks!

Interesting point of view, it's why I Iike to be on Talkchess. There are a lot of smart people despite some black sheep

I will continue to not reply to him keeping him on the ignore list. Now I will start to analyse the best games against top engines in long time games on my topic.

[hgm]

I warned Eduard that discussions about cheating should only be posted here, so you should not be bothered by it in other threads (one way or the other).

BTW, it seems that it would be easy to make a rating system very insensitive to this so-called 'farming'. The error is that it attaches equal weight to all games. While it should attach equal weight to all pairings. For the rating it is only important how many percent one person scores against another. It doesn't matter if that percentage was measured in 100 games or just a few. It might be a bit more reliable if it was in 100 games, but that is all, and certainly not a reason to derive the ratings mainly from that result. Especially if the result is an 'outlier' (i.e. very different from what you would predict from the ratings determined without taking that result into account).

[Eduard]

@ AlexChess: IbaiBuR, who is/was a moderator in the outskirts forum and who is a proven expert on Lichess, was the first of us to call you a cheater. From him came the first evidence that you were playing against yourself. Some others also wondered why you were doing this because they couldn't understand it. Of course you have an answer for everything instead of admitting, Yes, I cheated. IbaiBuR has given up on discussing things with you, that's the real reason why he doesn't write anything about you anymore. But you mock him too, not just me. It's you who made fun of IbaiBuR.

In the Outskirts Forum there is the sentence: The Outskirts Chess Forum is looking for people to fill the role of Moderator.

You are using this quote to insult IbaiBur and thus indirectly Sarona, who is also a moderator there. You deny them the ability to moderate because the forum is looking for more moderators. These people may just have less time for such things.

Anyone who accuses you of cheating (which is a fact and can be proven with games) you question. Of course, you yourself are the most honest player on the planet, and it's a disgrace when others call you a cheater. Such people are all evil. You are the only true good one.

[Eduard]

I warned Eduard that discussions about cheating should only be posted here, so you should not be bothered by it in other threads (one way or the other).

BTW, it seems that it would be easy to make a rating system very insensitive to this so-called 'farming'. The error is that it attaches equal weight to all games. While it should attach equal weight to all pairings. For the rating it is only important how many percent one person scores against another. It doesn't matter if that percentage was measured in 100 games or just a few. It might be a bit more reliable if it was in 100 games, but that is all, and certainly not a reason to derive the ratings mainly from that result. Especially if the result is an 'outlier' (i.e. very different from what you would predict from the ratings determined without taking that result into account).

AlexChess' bot rating lists can really only be described as fake. Such lists do not exist on Lichess. AlexChess still reserves the right to present it as true.

Several things in these lists are discriminatory. The fact is that a high Elo number can be achieved either through cheating or through farming. There is no other way. AlexChess only practices farming + cheating (can be proven with games).

Most of us players, as you correctly interpret, only play against equally strong bots. No one who has respect wants to play against weak bots. Most of our strong players have around 3000 Elo in bullet. Because we only play against the strong ones, the rating almost always stays the same. If 98% of all our games against each other end in a draw, then no one can climb in rating, no matter how strong they are!

But ProteusSF discriminates against us. He does 100% farming, which means he gains 300 Elo more than us. Then he presents himself in his lists as the king of the players. It's a shame to only play against 2400 Elo accounts - any honest player with 3000 would be ashamed to do that. ProteusSF takes advantage of this fact, which would embarrass us, to brag about its farming and present itself as the best player.

I've reached first place several times with farming, but I only played it to prove that it's easy to come first that way. Later I deleted these accounts because first place with farming means nothing to me.

In my opinion this is bad style. With his private lists, AlexChess also defames us as worse players than he is. His lists suggest: ProteusSF is the biggest player of lichess. That's not true, we just don't want to play like him, we don't want to rape the weak bots. But he does and even boasts about it.

[eduherminio]

Why? Cheating is serious business!

Because literally no one cares about lichess bot ratings apart from SF clones/derivatives/Frankesteins/whatever-they-want-to-call-them creators. Same applies to Playchess ratings