Site Ideas
12 Jul 08
05 Sep 08
Originally posted by no1marauderDave may have been a cheat and he may not have been. I don't know.
Your dear friend Dave was beyond any question a cheat as anyone who bothered to analyze his games would tell you.
Both you and Dave lied about the same thing; a USCF rating. He added a 1000 points to his and you pretended to have a Class A one. Both were fairly easily proven falsehoods.
It would have been legit for Dave-Schliemann- ...[text shortened]... a liar. I'd like to see the "substantial evidence" you supposedly have to support that claim.
You claim to know, but as you know, I and many others don't trust you or your judgement on this issue and many others.
Dave was a liar. He lied to me and to my clan and was no longer a member of my clan when he was banned.
He was an acquaintance and a member of my clan, but he was never a friend. There are a handful of people on this site I would consider to be friends. Dave was not one of them and, of course, neither are you.
I really have two issues with Dave's banning:
1. they caught him way too fast. The guy didn't play that many games and had way too many losses to have tested positive for cheating. For one thing, you would have to make the assumption that in all (or at least many) of the losses he blundered deliberately.
2. The game mod team that furnished the evidence that got him banned was almost immediately disbanded. That would lead a reasonable person to wonder about the circumstances and the possible connection between the two events. That team managed to get one player banned during their brief tenure.
I don't say all of this to defend Dave. I have no interest in defending Dave. I merely wish to point out the obvious inconsistencies in another flawed argument of yours.
05 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Red Night1. Before Dave's banning he had two losses in 77 games. One of them is a resignation in an unclear position. As usual, you have the facts badly wrong.
Dave may have been a cheat and he may not have been. I don't know.
You claim to know, but as you know, I and many others don't trust you or your judgement on this issue and many others.
Dave was a liar. He lied to me and to my clan and was no longer a member of my clan when he was banned.
He was an acquaintance and a member of my clan, but he wa I merely wish to point out the obvious inconsistencies in another flawed argument of yours.
2. You have the facts wrong here, too. Grintzi was banned the same day as the "National Master" and a few others had been banned in the weeks before. What possible connection in your mind (which is not that of a "reasonable person's"😉 would his banning have with the later disbanding of the team? Russ is the one who banned Dave and the others and Russ is the one who disbanded the team. Why don't you ask him if those two events were "connected"? Since neither decision was rescinded, I see no connection at all; if Russ thought the team had made a mistake regarding Dave (impossible BTW; he had as high matchups as IM31), he could have reinstated him with a hearty apology. That appears not to have happened.
So where exactly is my argument "flawed"? All you've produced is some innuendo based on a misstatement of the facts. None of it tends to show that Dave was banned for anything but being a cheat. You've claimed that there's "substantial evidence" he was banned for some other reason. Go ahead and present it.
EDIT: Dave was a liar; so are you. It would be nice if you retracted your false claim to having an 1880 USCF rating.
05 Sep 08
3 edits
Originally posted by Red NightAfter your cheat friend nmdavidb was banned you did post in OTB chess players club forum that you were not surprised about that as he lied about his rating.
Dave may have been a cheat and he may not have been. I don't know.
You claim to know, but as you know, I and many others don't trust you or your judgement on this issue and many others.
Dave was a liar. He lied to me and to my clan and was no longer a member of my clan when he was banned.
He was an acquaintance and a member of my clan, but he wa I merely wish to point out the obvious inconsistencies in another flawed argument of yours.
And its well known fact that you have been defended that cheat-liar when no1marauder pointed out his lies. If you know that he is liar then why did you defend him if he was not your friend?
About your "issues":
1. more than 70 games can be quite enough to catch cheater. Your claim that " they caught him way too fast" is baseless. number of loses does not count - if cheater has high engine matchup then sandbagging (including losing games by intention) will not help him.
2. "The game mod team that furnished the evidence that got him banned was almost immediately disbanded." - Blatant lies. Mod team was disbanded more than 2 months after nmdavidb was banned.
"I don't say all of this to defend Dave." are lies as your trying to defend him is obvious (look above).
By the way - I refuse to be in one club with liars, mudslingers of people detecting of cheats and cheat defenders. OTB chess players club is too narrow for both of us.
05 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by KorchIt would not surprise me if Dave was a cheat.
After your cheat friend nmdavidb was banned you did post in OTB chess players club forum that you were not surprised about that as he lied about his rating.
.
And I have stated repeatedly that Dave lied to us about who he was. Not initially, although that may have been a lie also, but subsequently when the heat was on him. At that time he tried to explain away certain discrepancies by claiming to be a different player, one whose rating was equal to his claimed rating. Unfortunately, the player he claimed to be was well known to afficiandos, but apparently not to Dave.
My issue relates to the way he was caught. The very idea that a system that cannot catch obvious cheats after 100s of games caught this one after 72 wins defies credulity.
05 Sep 08
Originally posted by Red NightHe was caught because his games were analyzed and showed overwhelming evidence of engine use. 'Nuff said.
It would not surprise me if Dave was a cheat.
And I have stated repeatedly that Dave lied to us about who he was. Not initially, although that may have been a lie also, but subsequently when the heat was on him. At that time he tried to explain away certain discrepancies by claiming to be a different player, one whose rating was equal to his claimed r ...[text shortened]... cannot catch obvious cheats after 100s of games caught this one after 72 wins defies credulity.
06 Sep 08
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveYes, and I will. If 30 recs is what people wants, then I'm not the one complaining about that, but I will still complain the misuse of the recs. Hence "I told ya".
I could've sworn you said you'd be happy to try whatever was decided on.
I think Russ know what he's doing. I think Russ has the control over things.
06 Sep 08
2 edits
Originally posted by Red NightThe very idea that a system that cannot catch obvious cheats after 100s of games caught this one after 72 wins defies credulity.
It would not surprise me if Dave was a cheat.
And I have stated repeatedly that Dave lied to us about who he was. Not initially, although that may have been a lie also, but subsequently when the heat was on him. At that time he tried to explain away certain discrepancies by claiming to be a different player, one whose rating was equal to his claimed r ...[text shortened]... cannot catch obvious cheats after 100s of games caught this one after 72 wins defies credulity.
Some cheats are cheating more blatantly and some are more careful. Some cheats have been reported and investigated earlier than others. And with accepting obvious cheats in your clan you have been showed inability to detect obvious cheats.
06 Sep 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasAt least you're still talking about the right topic in this thread.
Yes, and I will. If 30 recs is what people wants, then I'm not the one complaining about that, but I will still complain the misuse of the recs. Hence "I told ya".
I think Russ know what he's doing. I think Russ has the control over things.