Not at all, maybe he noticed a mate next move and checked that it is the mate. I am always checking the next move, before making that obvious one

​@@dmitripogosian5084well then why wouldn't he checkmate straight away then if he had already checked it?

​​@@dmitripogosian5084It seems suspicious bcoz of moves made prior and time used for them. Like every move he made looked like a 1 move calculation .Why take 4s to calculate mate and not play it instantly?

@@dmitripogosian5084 The next move took too long too

That is the only not sus thing. If you play on a toaster, it just sometimes takes time to let you pick your promoted piece. But the rest of the game speaks for itself.

maybe he was just turning on the rice cooker 😂

So did u learn that game? If yes, that's the lesson.

@@MarcoploTheTravellerwhat are you trying to say? The way you worded your statement doesn’t make any sense

​@@davidshatto7604 yeah, I'm confused, maybe that's his goal after all

Asian joke

Haha, you're right, Cagnus Marlsen!

No ways, same here! So many cheaters these days.

Hi Magnus

Magsun Carlnes and Hikamura Nakuru are good

Bros salty he lost he’s calling people cheaters 💀

And that's fine, but you not going to find the best move every move, not even close.

@@EnduroNerd Okay, not sure how that's related. (I fail to find the best moves regardless of how much time I take.) My comment is about the extreme consistency of time usage by cheaters, which is difficult to emulate, whether or not you find the right moves.

@@RandomChessPersonit is the combination of things. Taking that amount of time consistently and finding the best moves along with taking that time for very obvious moves.

@@PSOnoni : Yes, obviously. That's what he says in the video. I was *adding* the observation that it's difficult (at least for me) to emulate the time usage factor, even when I try. I apologize if that's not clear from my initial comment.

@@RandomChessPersonLol he probably didnt read the last part of your comment XD

Rice cookers are so obvious. Try something more imaginative. Maybe a Hibachi grill or a toaster oven. LOL

Ikr. My rating went up 5000 ELO after I ordered one. /j

😂

Lots of rice was used for this batch of bs 🤣

What is with these rice cooking comments

@@justsaadunoyeah1234 Rice means cheating. Few months ago on live stream on this channel there was a dubious player, who explained his strange time allocation by rice cooking. You have an obvious move, but need your engine's help to find it, so you can't make it instantly, even if you have played as if you have planned that move ahead. Explanation: you were cooking rice.

Or just quit. What good is a win or an elo if you cheat? You still know suck and you can't beat your friends over the board. So just do something else.

Sounds like an addiction problem😮

And in most cases they are right. Don´t know about chess, but in FPS games usually more than 30% of all players do cheat.

98% accuracy would probably be out of the question at 1200, as that level of accuracy is that of a bot.

@@johnb6723I’m 1150 and I’ve gotten a 95% and 97% accurate game before.

@@johnb6723 As Nelson indicated, your accuracy depends in part on your opponent. 1.g4 e5 2.f4 Qh4# get's Black 100%. If you're 1200 and played a lot of games, there's a good chance some opponent has made it easy for you to score 98%.

@@SwampCritter-df4od: It's one thing to have the occasional great game, but it's a COMPLETELY different thing for a low rated player to have LOTS of super accurate games. They're a low rated player due to deficiencies in part of their play. I play the opening like a fish, because I don't care to study opening lines. I play the ending more like a master because I find learning the correct concepts and techniques for MANY types of endgames absolutely fascinating. But presumably engines won't play like that.

Best to just delete the account altogether

What about separating players depending on trust rating (that is invisible to users) so if someone is suspected of cheating they get matched against other cheaters.

yeah you can easily find this dude on Nelsons account. Fun fact: the cheater lost against another cheater 🙂

yea, but unfortunately you can never trust certain people to not harass them.

Wayyy too obvious

they might have just been a good player on a new account to troll

That's what this game looked like to me: "calculated" is the right word.

I'm pretty sure they do it for the sake of happiness they get when reaching high elo's

Yeah you’re right

To play devils advocate you said his account was new so it is possible he's a high rated player climbing quickly through the ranks. However, that mfer is a cheater 100% no doubt in my mind. Ive seen it before. They're not even smart enough to vary move times and use slightly dubious moves from time to time. I mean, youre cheating for effs sakes you can afford to make a bad move or two. 98% on an opposite side kings indian? Nahh not happening even at that level.

His account is from 2008 though ... wierd! 100% cheated in this game though..

@@Sixsoul That's what I don't understand. If I was to cheat, assuming I'd be using the latest Stockfish, I'd do it a lot more subtly. Like I'd use it only once every 2 or 3 moves, I wouldn't use it for obvious recaptures, etc. Which makes me wonder, maybe there are already a lot of cheaters who do do it more subtly...

The account is already closed.

I mean, I’m 2000 rated and I would find it fast, but then spend like 5-10 seconds double and triple check it before playing it. Better be safe than sorry for those types of thing especially if you have the time imo. In all fairness, time usage in general was still very suspicious. I just wanted to point out that I don’t cheat and am moderately high rated and would still spend some time even if I wouls see the mate in 1 idea immediately.

He had just been been studying that variation of the KID in your chess class, IIRC. The key move(s) where he defends against the pin and fork witht he bishop and knight is reminiscent of something that happens all the time in the French, which we had just gone over.

totally

Time usage is key to finding out if they are a cheater.

Ok what is this true or is this false

Yes but you get weird games where they play like a beginner - then like an engine.

@@marcrob100 So?

@@FourthRoot "I don't really care if my opponent is a computer" - fine as long as you're happy with playing weird games

@@marcrob100 Would you object if a real person played weird?

@@FourthRoot Your point was "I don't really care if my opponent is a computer". Now what are you saying?: What if they are actually human?

To have an interesting game rather than finish it with a blunder on move 10 ? I often mentally beg my opponent to find the best continuation to explore the game further, rather than collapse and basically waste all the time I invested thinking. To blunder yourself, when there is still a fire in a game, is a waste as well. I find more troubling than cheating peoples preoccupation with a really meaningless rating, when you are not a professional for whom the rating is the currency. That is just pure vanity to the detriment of enjoyment of the game.

if all cheaters did was play tourney for money... it would be a insta ban

@@dmitripogosian5084 What is interesting about getting moves from a computer and playing them against a human?

@@PhenomenalChess Consistenly move after move - I do not see much interest. Occasional use to check if your thoughts are right - I can see the temptation

@@dmitripogosian5084 That makes sense. But I still won't feel nearly as satisfied with a win, knowing I got any kind of outside help. To each their own, I guess.

​​​​​​​@@chenruijiexinminss4804Who asked you? I sure didn't, atleast the op has an interesting thing to share unlike you saying the same damn two words adding nothing of value whatsoever to the conversation, why because ur jealous?

​@@chenruijiexinminss4804your so funny

Maybe they have talent XD

They probably just underrated

It could be the time of day. I play well in the morning but can't stop blundering my pieces after a long day at work. If I had two accounts to play on at different times, they'd probably be a few hundred elo apart. You never know if someone is slumping or peaking to get to your level.

Such no life's

Nelson said in a stream that weekly quiz videos took too long to make, so he stopped doing them and most likely won’t bring them back. About stump the chump, I have no idea

My coach always taught me as a kid - never rush obvious moves, that's how people blunder.

Ig it’s different at the 2000+ level but for me anything less than 10 seconds IS right away. I guess that’s why my blitz is over 400 points worse than my rapid (1550-1100) I have to look at the board and assess things every move or I make blunders

Maybe instead of assuming many people who beat you are cheaters, you should work on improving. If you report and nothing happens, then there's not enough OBJECTIVE evidence for actual cheating -- indicating you're likely imagining things -- if it happens often enough for you to complain about.

@@rogergeyer9851 stockfish rates me 800 to 900, yet I lose to 800s much more than half the time. That means a fair amount of them are cheating. I don't know who or why, all I know is the numbers don't add up. I play for fun in my spare time and don't really care about getting better. Cheaters spoil the fun though, don't they?

@@riffrats7545 A lot of 800s are coming up and maybe higher rated. As u get closer to 1000 u find the games even out more. Some 800s can be very strong players that have only just started an account

​@@riffrats7545 why would someone cheat just to be at 800 elo??

But that depends on the player. I was a GREAT closed position player and often blundered in wild open positions with lots of tactics. But I could move knights around and apply pressure over time very well, for example. I played the endgame VERY well generally, and was TERRIBLE in the opening. It was about personality and interest, NOT some basic thing about ability. I think one needs to be VERY careful about assuming an X kind of move is a sign of cheating without a LOT of supporting evidence. And I hate cheating as much as anyone.

You're just guessing. Or they're careful. Or they're getting older and no longer feel comfortable insta-moving like when they were 30 or 40 years younger (that's me). Now, I also don't play anything faster than 10 minute games since I'm slower, but the principle stands. You CAN'T reasonably just ASSUME ONE factor means "X is a cheater". That's why there is a PROCESS including checking statistics BEFORE banning, etc.

wow kudos to him that must take a genius to figure out bravo

@@yusufyusuf1998 okay

There are so many strong 800s and 900s atm. Where did they come from?

@@anamorfoplasis most 800s I play get rated way over 1000. Getting fed up of it!

I conceded to a woman I was dating a few times and dropped from 800ish down to 400ish. Currently 550 but it has been a hell of a grind back up. Harder than I remember 800 level being. I smash the 1300 bot, the 1500 bot kills me. lol

There's something demoralizing about cheaters in general. I didn't mind working hard for my grades in college (I got great grades by work ethic and persistence, NOT genius). Then I'd learn lots of people were cheating re using old tests (professors should change the tests), copying others' work, etc.

Honestly though you should be spending time in classical chess to think through positions. If you think you have an obvious move you should still be looking for a better move (Unless you're in time trouble obviously, play to your means) as that's how you're going to be a stronger player. I feel that you should be comfortable trying to use as much of your time as possible in every single game. The smaller the chunk of your time that you used, the more resources you are wasting.

That's partly why I like to play a beginner repertoire that can basically be forced every game. The London System as White, and then I play the Pirc Defense / King's Indian Defense as Black (they are almost identical with a slightly different move order). White has very little control over what opening gets played. Unless you're playing against a friend or you're playing against a computer from a specific starting position, you can't control what opening you go into when you start out with e5.

Yeah. Chess would be a lot easier if your opponent cooperated with you. 8-)

you're probably low level, its easy to tell cheating when someone at 600 elo is playing near 100% accuracy, he is a lot higher rated so while it's still noticeable its way harder to tell if it's good gameplay or cheating, either way there's no real reason to cheat you deserve to be pissed of after ruining other people's games

Reasonable, since NO ONE COULD POSSIBLY know the first 3 or 4 moves of an opening. /s I knew mediocre players who knew 20 moves of their favorite openings along certain lines -- but they were terrible in the ending, etc.

@@rogergeyer9851 exactly, either you know it, or you are dobious and you spend at least 10 seconds

@@rogergeyer9851 yeah but it's the timing. Either you know it and almost premove, or you start thinking. I know too 10-12 moves of certain openings, and then i get blasted 70% of the times lol

Random Encounter Boss Battle

Right. Real human players need to pause and consider strategy sometimes. They might make several rapid moves in a row if things go as expected, but THEN they need to check on things, figure things out again, etc. Plus, things often don't go just as planned, so then trying to rapidly move is very risky.

Opponents get refunded back the points on Nelson’s speed run account, though.

It's still not quite that simple. At the rate chess engines have progressed, there can be a very noticable difference between what a natural human looking move, and a computer looking move might be in all sorts of positions. An engine like Stockfish might recommend a move or series of moves that isn't natural or intuitive in the slightest and requires perfect accuracy to justify, whereas a human would play something that might be slightly worse but makes more sense for a normal chess player. Even if you're varying time spent on your moves, it's not just about how long you take for your moves but what moves you are actually playing. In a Vacuum one might get away with a really nice sequence here and there, but overtime patterns emerge and one can see a pattern of chess that looks suspiciously like an engine playing.

Unless ELO ratings changed completely since 1995 or so, you can't lose over 30 points in one game, even if you lose to someone rated 400 or more points lower than you (once you have an established rating, vs. being a provisionally rated player). Why just make things up? It's pretty ironic doing that when complaining about cheaters, BTW.

After the loss I played about 35 more games and lost almost all of them. I was 1540 in a rapid tournament . I played a person that was an 800 elo. The game was lost in 12 moves. 99% accuracy.

Do know what being tilted is dummy?

For their own satisfaction. Seeing "You win" gives them pleasure

You deserve more likea

Heh heh! As a cheater I like playing with your mind, & I impress girls with my chess rating. You'll never find & ban me I'm far too smart!

@@philsmith4218 if you were really that "smart" you wouldn't need to cheat. Go get a life