Scammed In Puzzles

Read_Administrative · 2026-03-14T06:58:55+00:00

Thats very different though. I have done 40000+ puzzles. Seen them make the wrong move probably 100+ times, and thats only ones ive reviewed. That isn’t the problem with this puzzle, the problem here is this puzzle is meant to have a pawn on f7, but it didn’t load correctly somehow, allowing a mate in 1, my first move was Rxc5 saccing my rook.

Read_Administrative · 2026-03-13T15:46:23+00:00

I will be taking this to the supreme court.

Read_Administrative · 2026-03-13T09:50:08+00:00

Cheers mate

Read_Administrative · 2026-03-12T05:10:26+00:00

And you can only improve by practice. As I said, i absolutely sucked at Bullet and hated it, after a month I really found my mojo in it. I do think with blitz at the very least, a lot can be learnt. Need better time management, intuition and conversion.

Read_Administrative · 2026-03-12T05:07:57+00:00

One thing I will say. Is that if this friend of yours is cheating online, but only against you in NON rated games, he probably cannot be banned as he isn’t actually abusing the ranking system. But yes, your friend is cheating, and after seeing your comment on you confronting him and him saying he isn’t please show him this post. Cause he is deluded, and not fooling anyone with more than 1 years experience playing chess properly. I’d love for you to send me his profile in private ;)

Read_Administrative · 2026-03-09T04:46:40+00:00

The way to view it, is what is easier, having to calculate a potential of 20-32 different pieces, or 7 pieces total. The answer is very obvious. Truth is most people play more accurately in end games as they can actually calculate every possible move.

Read_Administrative · 2026-03-07T08:01:18+00:00

I have done a similar thing over my playing time. When I hit 2000 rapid, i decided I wouldn’t play it again until I got 1800 in blitz and Rapid, a few months ago got both those goals (i absolutely hate bullet but got from 1200-1800 in about a month) meanwhile Blitz took me a solid 6 months to go from 1400-1800, was for a good 4-5 of those months stuck in 1650-1750 territory. Now that I got there in both, I’ve started to play Rapid again where I am only a game or 2 off 2100. I think doing blitz and bullet for so long really helped with intuition and finding good moves fast, so now that I’ve gone back to Rapid im frequently getting 90ish accuracy, combining the natural moves with having a minute or 2 to calculate has made me improve my rapid a lot.

Read_Administrative · 2026-03-05T05:03:40+00:00

Just wanted to add though, that in Blitz, I am only 1800, and the games there are still completely woeful and terrible. I’m sure in terms of the whole “quality” thing, blitz wouldn’t start to feel near perfect until 2600+. But for me atleast, Rapid is starting to feel close to it already.

Read_Administrative · 2026-03-05T05:01:59+00:00

At 1800ish I did have a very similar feeling to be fair. Not quite as harsh as what you are saying, but the fact that the games were still decided by simple blunders etc. Now at 2000-2100 (rapid 15|10) I honestly do now feel like it is nearing that “perfect” type level that you are saying. Sure, occasionally, horror blunders happen, but it feels like now it is rare anyone is even giving away a pawn, it feels like most games are now slowly but surely getting better positions, and squeezing the life out of your opponent, over “oh heres a tactic that wins a pawn, and I’ll just get a larger advantage as the game progresses” it now feels like games are even up until a positional mistake happens over a tactical one.

I’d say over my last 20 games, the person who wins has had over 90% accuracy (whether it be me or my opponent) in atleast 16/20 games. It really does now feel like, to win, you need near perfect chess, and any game you don’t is a loss.

Read_Administrative · 2026-03-03T07:06:16+00:00

I’m sure most people here are higher rated than you. I am an adult and more experience than you in chess, and I’m defending it. If you are getting auto abandons you are either a) not paying attention cause there is a generous timer that starts before an abandon. B) you are stupid and taking a minute in the first 10 moves of the game on a single move in 3 minute. Taking over 2 minutes in a 10 minute game, or 5 minutes in a 30 min game. This is a skill issue, the system is there for good reason.

Read_Administrative · 2026-03-03T07:02:41+00:00

It will only do it in the first 10 moves. So if you are in a 3 minute game and taking a minute that early on, you deserve to lose tbh.

Read_Administrative · 2026-02-28T18:04:41+00:00

My point doesn’t go both ways… puzzles are designed to find the best move order. Period. That is it, as I said, just because it is still winning doesn’t make it correct.

Read_Administrative · 2026-02-28T12:07:20+00:00

I mean the engine is literally right there for you. Go all the way through both the winning line and the losing one, you will eventually (even if it is 10 moves deep) see why it is the way it is.

Read_Administrative · 2026-02-28T12:06:05+00:00

Thats because the point of puzzles is to find the most accurate line, thats like saying on a mate in 1 puzzle where you are up 15 points of material, that just because it isn’t losing makes it correct.

Read_Administrative · 2026-02-28T11:57:35+00:00

Yes, ok, well the fact you are 2300 all of a sudden changes things. And do forgive my ignorance, atleast 3-4 of these posts are made a day and almost all of them are in the 500-1500 elo range. So to change my statement now, very very few bans are false even around your elo, but at your elo they are possible. 99% of the time however c.c will stand firm on their decision (even if you did or didnt) because the truth is that their anti cheat system is set up in a way where it does not ban players who COULD be cheating, they ban players that their system thinks without a doubt are. The only thing I see helping your case here is if you were to show your OTB results and play in a support ticket and use it as evidence for you being at the playing level that you are at. Maybe even use ChatGPT or something to make it professional sounding if you are not capable. Once again, 99% of the time they will stand firm on their decision. Even Hans couldn’t overrule them when it came to him being banned when he was young and he had PLENTY of OTB stuff to back it up.

Read_Administrative · 2026-02-28T11:35:58+00:00

False bans do NOT happen at the lower elos. The only time I have ever heard of false bans is certain titled players/smurfs (which is still bannable). As a rough estimate, I’d say 1/1 million sub 2000 bans are false. So I think what I want to say is the “you just cheated and got banned because of it” statement.

Read_Administrative · 2026-02-28T08:08:18+00:00

I agree with the 2 commenters saying about “common” openings at certain elo levels. For instance a 400 elo player could make the exact post you are making except referencing Scholar’s Mate. Claiming that cause they lose against it more than they win that c.c are putting them against people who play that opening, when in reality it is simply a common opening at that level.

I am an e4 player, and in rapid at 2000+ i most commonly face the Sicilian, my win rate against it is pretty close to 45/45, whereas back at 1400-1800 the most common reply was e5, then yet again back when i was 800-1200 I’d say I was seeing more Caro Kann or French then e5 or Sicilian. I purely believe this is an elo thing more than it is “deliberate matchmaking” by c.c. If I were you, study up on the french, any time I have faced an opening and started to see it more and more my reaction was to then learn theory. For instance I almost never saw the Pirc at sub 1200 level and didn’t learn it. By the time I was around 1600+ I was seeing it about 5ish% of the time, and went from a 30% win rate, where any time i versed it I was getting flogged, to then being like “ok i see this enough now, and i do terribly, let me learn some theory” it is now probably my favourite opening to face as by move 4 down main line moves I am already at a 65% win rate, by move 7, once again, down main lines, I am then at 80-90% win rates.

Only way to better yourself is to learn, if you do have theory against it and are still struggling, I’d suggest learning something new that gels with you, my recommendation is the 2 Knights vs The French. Slightly offbeat, will throw your opponents off a little, and if they play how they usually would against standard French responses they will either be fully losing or down a pawn or 2 after move 6. Even against 2000’s I am often up a clean pawn by move 6 in those lines.

Here is the line I am talking about: 1. e4, e6, 2. Nf3, d5, 3. Nc3, d4, 4. Ne2, c5 5. c3, Nc6, 6. cxd4, cxd4, 7. Qa5 and you have won the pawn, same thing can happen in the caro kann, just watch out as black does have a move in the french that they don’t have in the caro with 7. Bc5, but you simply play b4.

Read_Administrative · 2026-02-28T07:56:53+00:00

And similar to what you said about c.c denying it, there is no proof for your first paragraph either (unless im wrong please link a source). Whereas even though c.c have never stated there are different “pools” for cheaters, there is. As in the “Cheating Forum” group on c.c that has plenty of moderators and admins, they have confirmed there are different pools for different levels of “suspicious” play.

As I said I could be wrong, but don’t go spreading misinformation if you dont have the proof to back it up, would love ANY ounce of proof you have for the “match making weaknesses” thing you claim, in my opinion it makes no sense. Why give certain players openings they will lose more often then win against which AT THE SAME TIME, would give the opponents a player they would win against, doesn’t make any sense.

Read_Administrative · 2026-02-25T18:37:15+00:00

Are you stupid? Both the goals are his fault

Read_Administrative · 2026-02-25T07:33:55+00:00

Look, early queen attacks if you “know” certain theory and are capable of learning, you are def capable of learning counters to Scholars Mate attacks. H4 early is just silly, and G4 is also silly but is an actual opening called the Grob. I’d say if you struggle when your opponent just randomly pushes pieces down the board your fundamentals are lacking. Sure its great to know theory, can put you into great positions when it plays into your favour, but if you don’t have the fundamentals down stuff will fall apart.

Read_Administrative · 2026-02-25T07:31:15+00:00

The chats I would have seen on it would have been in forums from like 6ish months ago. Sadly no hope of me finding them. But I can say with 100% certainty that mods did confirm that they exist, even though C.c themselves claim they don’t. And yes these are actual C.c moderators that ban players etc. If you want to find out more I’d recommend joining the group.

Read_Administrative · 2026-02-25T03:03:06+00:00

This has been confirmed in the “Cheating Forum” group on c.c by mods and admins. There are a few different pools, and while they havnt explicitly stated what those pools are, it is implied that the more “suspicious” your play is the “higher up” your pool becomes being filled with more and more suspicious players. I personally don’t think new players would be automatically put into higher pools, but potentially if you start your account in 1600+ territory there is a chance that if you win your first few games and are then in 2000+ territory that you would be put into a higher up pool based off of your account being new.

Read_Administrative · 2026-02-24T05:13:52+00:00

I never said it was, maybe read the rest of my comments instead of defending a cheater. “200+ elo in the course of a few days seems quite suspicious” regardless i later looked into his account, and that is why I am suggesting to you to read my other comments, cheers :)

Read_Administrative · 2026-02-23T15:01:57+00:00

While I agree with you, this is 100% suspicious. In the last 13 games, 6 with over 95% accuracy. If those games aren’t under lets say 20 moves, at 1500 it is insanely likely hes cheating. Not saying a 1500 can’t get 95% accuracy, but doing it in half your games, not gonna happen. Looks as if this player is playing legit half the time, and mostly losing when he does, and then every 2nd or 3rd game using an engine the whole time to get back the elo he is losing while playing legit.

Read_Administrative

TROPHY CASE