TLDR Begin...
When it comes to the topic of "cheating", it is always a very good idea for us to choose something else to talk about.
...TLDR End.
Before the chess boom in 2020, several studies were done by researchers who were completely independent from one another. I was one of them.
I deduced that, on Lichessorg, the rate of cheating was about 1%-3%, with 4% being impossible, in the classical time control, for people rated above 2000.
And on Chesscom, the cheating would have been somewhere between 4%-8% at the same skill level and time control.
The others came up with numbers that were almost identical.
The estimates were based on the frequency of successful reports on Lichess, and then comparing it to what Chesscom was doing with accounts who met those exact same standards and markers for suspicion. (It should also be noted that, at that point in time, the algorithms weren't yet auto-banning the more blatant cases.)
One of the glaring differences between the two, was that, in many cases, the Chesscom accounts had been around for years, where Lichess very rarely, almost never, had those same levels of suspected cheaters whose accounts were not brand new. (In Lichessorg, most of them were only days/weeks old, a few of them were months old, but the vast minority were years old.)
Also, not only that, but while I was frequenting Chesscom to do my research, my account was actually "put under review" for a few days, where they claimed they were investigating me, and then they reinstated my account having found nothing.
Others had the same experience of being false flagged, as well.
So, they seem to leave probable cheaters alone, and suspend legitimate accounts.
-
Further, in 2020 I tried a medication to help my concentration, and I won 20 games straight and jumped about 150 rating points.
This fact, on its face, shows that there are very good odds of not running into cheaters for 20 games.
And if the one loss I suffered was a cheater, which it almost definitely won't have been, then that would be 5%.
As such, the estimates, I think, must be very close to reality, and cheaters are actually at a complete minimum in online chess.
-
Also, as far as cheating goes, when it comes to cheating in chess, it must be the most grueling and thankless platform to cheat on.
Many of the different pathologies that influence people to cheat, are simply not present on the chess board.
Also, for the vast majority of cheaters, the viability for one of them to cheat in the long term, whether they're caught or not, is negligible. The interest has to burn out. It's exactly that simple and there probably isn't any way around it.
The vast majority of us know exactly what it is that keeps us at the chess board, decade after decade...the chess...itself.
Without the chess, itself, the interest must be transient!
I imagine that most of the cheaters from 2020-2022 have long since moved on.
But, whoever loves the game will be at the board to stay indefinitely.
So, be encouraged! Things will only continue to get better from here until it returns to beyond the days before the boom.
-
With that said, there is a massive problem just having this discussion and shining a spotlight on it, because people with less love for the game, less integrity, and less respect, might not think that there is a big problem with them running an engine in order to "prove" the "actual" amount.
They don't understand that there are many different reasons and pathologies that drive people to cheat, and that this pseudo-rationale for running an engine is probably one of the biggest reasons.
*Any* visibility brought to the matter, in fact, is a big problem, and will only help to cause more suspicion, and therefore more cheating, and will not to help to alleviate it.
If we knew what we were doing, we would never use the word "cheat" and we would force everyone to come across the matter independently, on their own, instead of spot-lighting it and putting it in the forefront of peoples' psyches.
-
Now, Lichessorg, for a long time, was already implementing cheat detection algorithms.
They have years of a head start on Chesscom.
For those that don't know, before Chesscom decided to cash in on their domain name and go full corporate, Chesscom used to be the most rinky-dink site. It was glitchy, clunky and looked very cheap.
And one of the last things that they worried about was cheat detection.
Remember, it was marketing that turned that company a profit, not providing the best service.
Lichessorg, on the other hand, began as a non-profit and remains a non-profit.
The reason that Lichessorg exists is because a chess fan, who was also a programmer, decided that he would practice his wares and apply it to his hobby. His mission was to give the chess world the best online platform, cheat-free, for free, full version, no limits on the engines or puzzles, no advertising, and with all of the resources being open source and crowd funded.
Lichessorg has years of taking the problem of cheating seriously, from its inception, where cheaters would create an account on Lichessorg, get banned inside a day, create another one, get banned in a week, create another one, get banned in a month, and where they would then give up and migrate to Chesscom where they didn't have to keep making new profiles.
The result was that Lichessorg evolved into a more cheat-free environment, and Chesscom devolved into being a less cheat-free environment.
On Lichess, I've had numerous people banned before my game is even finished!
It was, basically, a one-way street for quite a few years until Chesscom finally realized that they should have been taking the matter more seriously.
Further, once the word got out about Lichessorg, Chesscom users, who hoped for greener pastures in Lichessorg, migrated and further evolved Lichessorg, where the Chesscom cheaters had no such incentive to make the move and just stayed with Chesscom.
Then, in a marketing debacle, Chesscom announced that 'they run world class cheat detection' and thought that it would be a great way to capitalize on one of their chronic cheaters making the headlines.
But there were two problems with that strategy:
1. One of the motivations to cheat is to give up trying to beat players at the board, but using a sociopathic rationale that 'if I can outdo the cheat-detection, then I'm actually smarter than them all'.
As such, marketing oneself as 'the best cheat detection' will have absorbed 100% of the people who cheat, as well as the 'Johnny-Come-Latelies', in an effort to stress-test the anti-cheat teams.
Meanwhile, they have no motivation to stress-test Lichessorg.
Granted, many of the people still feel that 'paying for a subscription' must offer them some kind of a greater chance at a cheat-free environment...however...most of the chess world has already made it known that Lichessorg is the actual gold standard, and that "you get what you pay for" isn't actually always true 100% of the time; and that Lichessorg has proven themselves as an exception to the rule.
2. In one of the biggest business blunders of this decade, Chesscom decides to announce to the chess world that:
"Hello Chessworld! We just wanted to let you know that people who cheat will have their accounts suspended for a short amount of time before being allowed to return...again...and again. So, here on out, understand that there is a chance that someone you're playing was already banned for cheating." - Chesscom (paraphrased)
-
Yet, with almost no marketing but for word of mouth, Lichessorg still has people debating "Who is better?"
That, in itself, is proof positive that Lichessorg completely and objectively must outshine Chesscom as far as proficient cheat detection, and quality of site, is concerned.
Logically, "I pay for a subscription at Chesscom for a bit more peace of mind. It's better," should be the overwhelming narrative.
Lichessorg shouldn't be *anywhere* near the discussion as being 'the most competent'.
Yet, here they are.
And, again, due to years of hard work and pro bono anti-cheat experts, anti-cheat programs and algorithms, and die hard chess fans who wanted to make that platform as good as it could be, there is no way for Chesscom to fake the funk because the chess world sees through all of it.
Those of us who've been around since the days of dial-up, and long before YouTube ever existed, we were there. We know. We saw the evolution from MSN Zone, to Yahoocom/Excitecom, to FICS, Playchess, and Internet Chess Club.
Granted, if I stumbled across chess after 2020, I'd have no empirical understanding, and I might very well just choose to parrot something which I heard one of the crowds say.
-
And, for the record, this entire conversation is supposed to be a non-starter because I.C.C. was in a position to absolutely, and permanently, dominate the entirety of the online chess world.
Every GM used to play there and/or teach from there.
It was just about the only place to play that had anti-cheat measures, and there is no reason that sites like Chesscom or Lichessorg should have had the ability to even begin to get their foot in the door.
I.C.C. was the first, and just about the only place, that live streamed analyses on chess tournaments from around the globe.
But, because I.C.C. apparently decided to retire instead of reinvesting their millions in order to keep up with the Jones'...here we are.
-
Anyway, here on out, Lichessorg will probably continue to rule the roost, regardless of Chesscom's corporate veneer. With just about no marketing, at all, more and more people are learning about it, and there is a very good reason for that.
Lichess people would rather be good than look good.
When it comes to the topic of "cheating", it is always a very good idea for us to choose something else to talk about.
...TLDR End.
Before the chess boom in 2020, several studies were done by researchers who were completely independent from one another. I was one of them.
I deduced that, on Lichessorg, the rate of cheating was about 1%-3%, with 4% being impossible, in the classical time control, for people rated above 2000.
And on Chesscom, the cheating would have been somewhere between 4%-8% at the same skill level and time control.
The others came up with numbers that were almost identical.
The estimates were based on the frequency of successful reports on Lichess, and then comparing it to what Chesscom was doing with accounts who met those exact same standards and markers for suspicion. (It should also be noted that, at that point in time, the algorithms weren't yet auto-banning the more blatant cases.)
One of the glaring differences between the two, was that, in many cases, the Chesscom accounts had been around for years, where Lichess very rarely, almost never, had those same levels of suspected cheaters whose accounts were not brand new. (In Lichessorg, most of them were only days/weeks old, a few of them were months old, but the vast minority were years old.)
Also, not only that, but while I was frequenting Chesscom to do my research, my account was actually "put under review" for a few days, where they claimed they were investigating me, and then they reinstated my account having found nothing.
Others had the same experience of being false flagged, as well.
So, they seem to leave probable cheaters alone, and suspend legitimate accounts.
-
Further, in 2020 I tried a medication to help my concentration, and I won 20 games straight and jumped about 150 rating points.
This fact, on its face, shows that there are very good odds of not running into cheaters for 20 games.
And if the one loss I suffered was a cheater, which it almost definitely won't have been, then that would be 5%.
As such, the estimates, I think, must be very close to reality, and cheaters are actually at a complete minimum in online chess.
-
Also, as far as cheating goes, when it comes to cheating in chess, it must be the most grueling and thankless platform to cheat on.
Many of the different pathologies that influence people to cheat, are simply not present on the chess board.
Also, for the vast majority of cheaters, the viability for one of them to cheat in the long term, whether they're caught or not, is negligible. The interest has to burn out. It's exactly that simple and there probably isn't any way around it.
The vast majority of us know exactly what it is that keeps us at the chess board, decade after decade...the chess...itself.
Without the chess, itself, the interest must be transient!
I imagine that most of the cheaters from 2020-2022 have long since moved on.
But, whoever loves the game will be at the board to stay indefinitely.
So, be encouraged! Things will only continue to get better from here until it returns to beyond the days before the boom.
-
With that said, there is a massive problem just having this discussion and shining a spotlight on it, because people with less love for the game, less integrity, and less respect, might not think that there is a big problem with them running an engine in order to "prove" the "actual" amount.
They don't understand that there are many different reasons and pathologies that drive people to cheat, and that this pseudo-rationale for running an engine is probably one of the biggest reasons.
*Any* visibility brought to the matter, in fact, is a big problem, and will only help to cause more suspicion, and therefore more cheating, and will not to help to alleviate it.
If we knew what we were doing, we would never use the word "cheat" and we would force everyone to come across the matter independently, on their own, instead of spot-lighting it and putting it in the forefront of peoples' psyches.
-
Now, Lichessorg, for a long time, was already implementing cheat detection algorithms.
They have years of a head start on Chesscom.
For those that don't know, before Chesscom decided to cash in on their domain name and go full corporate, Chesscom used to be the most rinky-dink site. It was glitchy, clunky and looked very cheap.
And one of the last things that they worried about was cheat detection.
Remember, it was marketing that turned that company a profit, not providing the best service.
Lichessorg, on the other hand, began as a non-profit and remains a non-profit.
The reason that Lichessorg exists is because a chess fan, who was also a programmer, decided that he would practice his wares and apply it to his hobby. His mission was to give the chess world the best online platform, cheat-free, for free, full version, no limits on the engines or puzzles, no advertising, and with all of the resources being open source and crowd funded.
Lichessorg has years of taking the problem of cheating seriously, from its inception, where cheaters would create an account on Lichessorg, get banned inside a day, create another one, get banned in a week, create another one, get banned in a month, and where they would then give up and migrate to Chesscom where they didn't have to keep making new profiles.
The result was that Lichessorg evolved into a more cheat-free environment, and Chesscom devolved into being a less cheat-free environment.
On Lichess, I've had numerous people banned before my game is even finished!
It was, basically, a one-way street for quite a few years until Chesscom finally realized that they should have been taking the matter more seriously.
Further, once the word got out about Lichessorg, Chesscom users, who hoped for greener pastures in Lichessorg, migrated and further evolved Lichessorg, where the Chesscom cheaters had no such incentive to make the move and just stayed with Chesscom.
Then, in a marketing debacle, Chesscom announced that 'they run world class cheat detection' and thought that it would be a great way to capitalize on one of their chronic cheaters making the headlines.
But there were two problems with that strategy:
1. One of the motivations to cheat is to give up trying to beat players at the board, but using a sociopathic rationale that 'if I can outdo the cheat-detection, then I'm actually smarter than them all'.
As such, marketing oneself as 'the best cheat detection' will have absorbed 100% of the people who cheat, as well as the 'Johnny-Come-Latelies', in an effort to stress-test the anti-cheat teams.
Meanwhile, they have no motivation to stress-test Lichessorg.
Granted, many of the people still feel that 'paying for a subscription' must offer them some kind of a greater chance at a cheat-free environment...however...most of the chess world has already made it known that Lichessorg is the actual gold standard, and that "you get what you pay for" isn't actually always true 100% of the time; and that Lichessorg has proven themselves as an exception to the rule.
2. In one of the biggest business blunders of this decade, Chesscom decides to announce to the chess world that:
"Hello Chessworld! We just wanted to let you know that people who cheat will have their accounts suspended for a short amount of time before being allowed to return...again...and again. So, here on out, understand that there is a chance that someone you're playing was already banned for cheating." - Chesscom (paraphrased)
-
Yet, with almost no marketing but for word of mouth, Lichessorg still has people debating "Who is better?"
That, in itself, is proof positive that Lichessorg completely and objectively must outshine Chesscom as far as proficient cheat detection, and quality of site, is concerned.
Logically, "I pay for a subscription at Chesscom for a bit more peace of mind. It's better," should be the overwhelming narrative.
Lichessorg shouldn't be *anywhere* near the discussion as being 'the most competent'.
Yet, here they are.
And, again, due to years of hard work and pro bono anti-cheat experts, anti-cheat programs and algorithms, and die hard chess fans who wanted to make that platform as good as it could be, there is no way for Chesscom to fake the funk because the chess world sees through all of it.
Those of us who've been around since the days of dial-up, and long before YouTube ever existed, we were there. We know. We saw the evolution from MSN Zone, to Yahoocom/Excitecom, to FICS, Playchess, and Internet Chess Club.
Granted, if I stumbled across chess after 2020, I'd have no empirical understanding, and I might very well just choose to parrot something which I heard one of the crowds say.
-
And, for the record, this entire conversation is supposed to be a non-starter because I.C.C. was in a position to absolutely, and permanently, dominate the entirety of the online chess world.
Every GM used to play there and/or teach from there.
It was just about the only place to play that had anti-cheat measures, and there is no reason that sites like Chesscom or Lichessorg should have had the ability to even begin to get their foot in the door.
I.C.C. was the first, and just about the only place, that live streamed analyses on chess tournaments from around the globe.
But, because I.C.C. apparently decided to retire instead of reinvesting their millions in order to keep up with the Jones'...here we are.
-
Anyway, here on out, Lichessorg will probably continue to rule the roost, regardless of Chesscom's corporate veneer. With just about no marketing, at all, more and more people are learning about it, and there is a very good reason for that.
Lichess people would rather be good than look good.
