Managed to get a selective cheat banned. Well done Lichess

@Akbar2thegreat said in #6:
> I was playing a tournament and was paired against a 1600 player. I didn't do any major blunder but was outplayed. And on some intense positions he was always correct. Plus he often took more time even on some basic moves. He literally seemed to be playing like engine. My strong feeling made me report him. Few hours later, I got notification that the user was banned. Kudos to wonderful committee there who are active to check games for possible cheat on users report.

1600 player means 1100 or 1200 in real life.

Well, according to my experience clever cheaters always use the engine to cheat and after they gained an advantage they might mix along their own moves which prevents them from being caught.

You can easily catch a cheater by checking how much time he takes for each move (if he takes the same amount of time for each move he is a definite cheater).

@SAIFANNOUSHAD said in #13:
> You can easily catch a cheater by checking how much time he takes for each move (if he takes the same amount of time for each move he is a definite cheater).

I don't think most cheats are detected this way. During the Kazakhstan Cup, the online lichess players had to have cameras and fide arbiters on zoom calls. That says all you need to know about the anti-cheat of lichess :(

Its free and a wonderful site but the cheats are running rampant with little signs of being stopped.

@willywonka2020 said in #14:
> I don't think most cheats are detected this way. During the Kazakhstan Cup, the online lichess players had to have cameras and fide arbiters on zoom calls. That says all you need to know about the anti-cheat of lichess :(
>
> Its free and a wonderful site but the cheats are running rampant with little signs of being stopped.
I just said one of the ways a cheater could be found.

@gabrr82 said in #3:
> I just played another day a guy that made several blunders in the opening and middle game.
> So, just out of nowhere, he started to play as Karpov himself. All good moves in a row, creating passed pawns and magically using his king to support them. So this guy who played pretty mediocre before, now could not only defend a huge material disadvantage, but turn tables and get the advantage back.
>
> I didn't complain, because I played a pretty much shitty endgame, so that's on me. But I found that a little weird, to use an euphemism...

Using the king to support passed pawns is definitely magic and undeniable proof of engine usage. Shame on them! They should be banned!

@Le_Patzer83 said in #16:
> Using the king to support passed pawns is definitely magic and undeniable proof of engine usage. Shame on them! They should be banned!

I never said that, and you know what, maybe you are right. I didn't play exactly brilliantly after that. But I found that very weird (which is different of having a proof or knowing it for sure). I just found it suspicious.

I didn't even waste my time to check the cheat and turn him down to admins, so whatever, I played badly anyway so I deserved it in the first place.

There are many ways to support the pawns with the king, he did it in a very precise way, and made it very difficult to deffend, maybe he is just very good afterall and blundering two pieces was a one time ocasion, so who knows.

@JuergenWerner said in #11:
> 1600 player means 1100 or 1200 in real life.
Not always. There may be a stronger player who hasn't played much online and has relatively lower rating.
Anyways, I meant that I reported based on computer analysis and all not just because of opponent rating.