Are we really playing humans on here?

No wonder shes an ex

Ben Finegold had a whole video on this topic, it was called Blunders, I think. Basically, when you have a winning position you relax and start blundering instead of remembering you still have to make good moves to win. Don't relax, ever.

Bro, it was you who made a big blunder, so don't complain

Of course, I "blundered". However, why is there an absence of human behavior? When you finish a game, don't you go back and look at how it went with an engine? I just won a Scotch game. Mistakes back and forth. However, my opponent wasn't doing too poorly. It's surprising not to see them going over the game, or do we not see that info? In the lower left it shows "Spectators" (even when there is only 1 LOL, grammar guys) and it's always just me going over the game.

I wouldn't expect everyone to do this, but after 100 games you would think a few people would use it. Especially those that lasted to an endgame with one rook and maybe a pawn or two left on the board. That is why I question the human participation, there is no talking. I don't care about losing to a human if I made mistakes. I am questioning it on games I am also winning. There was one guy yesterday completely outplaying me in the Sicilian (if I remember correctly) and then all of a sudden he misses a mate in 1 against himself? Usually humans ask for a rematch when this happens. But this isn't happening either.

I wish there was a way to know you are playing a human. For example, if you had to type in 10 lines of text to your opponent after a game was played. Not just text a bot could spit out but also answers to questions from your opponent. All it would take is a redirect to the analysis board, you type a few lines, answer your opponent's questions (Why did you play blah blah on move 24?, that kind of thing). Even if the human didn't know the answer, you then allow the person questioning to ask another question and it could be random (say your favorite color with numbers between each letter, "r3e2d").

And to those defenders of the site at all cost, why is there a "Black to checkmate in one move." for every time you start a post if they weren't worried themselves about bots?

Like I said, I don't mind losing to humans. I just find it strange that there is a consistency of me in winning positions and having the advantage on this site compared to other sites and not being able to win (it's like putting in a position against Stockfish 10 in Tarrasch and trying to play it out). And I have no evidence the person on the other end is a human. No replies, no post-analysis conversation, nothing.

It makes you wonder, even when you do win the games. How accurate is this?

I think the weakness of this suggestion is it will weed out the computer players who have the decency to shut up while they are beating the crap out of you, mean while the really annoying computer players who constantly badger you in the chat (while beating the crap out of you) and gloat about how easily they are winning without even having to think, will still be able to defeat detection.

Here we go guys, you want a game? Here is one. The main skepticism in my questions is why my opponent was only active 1 minute before the game started and I waited a long time to be paired. Also, why didn't they resign earlier? The position where they blundered was also suspect. After that they somehow tried to catch me off guard. I showed one example. I think there were at least 2 or 3 times they did this. I don't see how a human would think so fast to do this after spending 3-4 times the amount of time and blundering their queen. And then at the end, it goes from terrible -56 something position to mate and then they automatically resign. How would a human know to do this? The person still had time on the clock before clicking the resign button. Why not think a little longer and then decide?

See for yourself and decide, lichess.org/study/N7tXuUy6

#24 "And to those defenders of the site at all cost, why is there a "Black to checkmate in one move." for every time you start a post if they weren't worried themselves about bots?"

Oh dear, they are afraid of *spam* bots, not chess bots. Against a chessplaying bot, a chess-captcha is nonsense, isn't it?

@sheckley666 I wouldn't know either way. I am just showing what I see. Prevention is being taken. I am not saying a screwdriver is doing the wrench's job. I am simply pointing to the toolbox.

The box that I keep my tools in is red

@tigerprowl I am 2000+ in classical , but I sometimes I play amazing games , other times I blunder winning positions.Your opponent doesn't have to analyze his games . Quit bitching that you lose games.You have no idea what is the difference betwen a stonger player and a cheater.