lichess.org
Donate

Farewell

@LoLLLLLLLLLLL said in #29:
> he didnt seem to have the rating of a cheater, if I remember he was like 2200 in everything

2376 after the final game. That was probably a rapid rating, because the rating goes on the original time control of the game even if you berserk it into a faster time control.
@earlpurple said in #31:
> 2376 after the final game. That was probably a rapid rating, because the rating goes on the original time control of the game even if you berserk it into a faster time control.
still not a cheater rating at all i wouldn't think...
@gbtami said in #28:
> I just checked pepe latest games on lichess.org/games/search?players.a=pepellou&dateMin=2023-03-01&dateMax=2023-03-26&sort.field=d&sort.order=desc&analysed=1#results

He was definitely accused from a game in that tournament. Second, to last comment is someone saying something like "byebye Pepellou". The game in question was scrubbed from the tournament results, implying mods thought it involved cheating. Computer analysis only leans one way but the strongest moves all looked fairly obvious to me, and i'm 1300.



This scenario reminds me of @CheckRaiseMate recent blog post detailing the story of winning against Hikaru Nakamura in a tournament leading to a call from chessdotcom's fairplay team (in the middle of the tournament(!).

lichess.org/@/CheckRaiseMate/blog/beating-hikaru/DmcA0xHs

I see how we got to this point but if the crackdown on cheating just means it's not worth it to excel fairly what's the point?
@earlpurple said in #30:
> 1. I didn't know I could search the games that way. Quite useful.
> 2. The ban came after playing in a "rapid" arena 7+5. But because pepellou berserked every game, he was playing 3.5+0
> 3. It appears he won every game but one, and beat Grandmaster DJ Haubi in the final game having drawn earlier.
> 4. It wasn't perfect chess, but you wonder if the GM reported him: After all, he might ask, if his opponent is so strong, why isn't he titled?
>
> If so, that's a terrible reason to ban him. He won because he played a better game. No clear evidence he used an engine, maybe just his opponent made a bad blunder under time pressure (he had also berserked). Or maybe pepe is good enough to be a titled player but that involves a strong commitment that he doesn't wish to make in his lifestyle?

Yeah - and look at how that GM played - the mistakes AND blunders he made. There was nothing odd about someone Pepe's strength winning that game.
@spidersneedlovetoo said in #33:
> He was definitely accused from a game in that tournament. Second, to last comment is someone saying something like "byebye Pepellou". The game in question was scrubbed from the tournament results, implying mods thought it involved cheating. Computer analysis only leans one way but the strongest moves all looked fairly obvious to me, and i'm 1300.

Wow.

If that's the game in question, how on earth did this withstand an appeal??
@JoannaTries said in #34:
> Yeah - and look at how that GM played - the mistakes AND blunders he made. There was nothing odd about someone Pepe's strength winning that game.

GM played very badly and in the drawn game there was a winning move 13...bxc3 and a winning move 17...Nb2. Would a cheater allow a losing position against a strong opponent?

There is no cheating apparent. Any 2100 player OTB can play these games without computer.

But streamers shouldn't get a special treatment. Some time ago I saw someone play a move suggestion from chat which he clearly had missed and win the game.
@ColossusChess said in #38:
> But streamers shouldn't get a special treatment. Some time ago I saw someone play a move suggestion from chat which he clearly had missed and win the game.

That's a good point but it wasn't this guy. I've watched a game where Pepe streamed a Gambit challenge and when people made suggestions from the chat he admonished them that it was a rated game and then said he'd have to play a different move since they suggested it before he saw it. Just one of a few reasons I think the dude's got ethics and isn't cheating.
@LoLLLLLLLLLLL said in #29:
> he didnt seem to have the rating of a cheater, if I remember he was like 2200 in everything

What is the rating of a cheater?? I noticed some cheaters with a 1900 rating or less. It happens that an account plays years without cheating and then suddenly starts to use an engine.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.