I'll be waiting for clarification on this issue. If this is allowed, I will probably migrate back to chess.com as much as I prefer Lichess over it. Cheating prevention is much more important to me than anything else and to allow it is laughably idiotic and short sighted.
Canceled my monthly patron. Shame on you @thibault
Unbelievable that they even changed the Terms of Service on this website to protect these cheaters: web.archive.org/web/20160803191919/https://en.lichess.org/terms-of-service
Now changed to "and having a friend help you (an exception can be made for team accounts, when playing on live stream)."
Unbelievable that they even changed the Terms of Service on this website to protect these cheaters: web.archive.org/web/20160803191919/https://en.lichess.org/terms-of-service
Now changed to "and having a friend help you (an exception can be made for team accounts, when playing on live stream)."
I'd like to state that this topic is a matter of principle, and most of the arguments brought here are completely irrelevant. I agree that consulting on the moves is, by definition, a form of external help, and should be banned. It's not important at all whether or not the external assistance results in better moves or results.
That being said, if a site decides to approve such a thing while streaming, under very specific conditions, to specific people who meet some criterions, where the educational value might exceed the harm, and the harm is only to those who care more about the win rather than having fun and improve- Then I'll definitely consider streaming in this fashion in the future, but only with the explicit permission of both the site AND the community.
On a positive note: The harm was relatively small and now we have a healthy discussion on an extremly important topic, that'll most probably affect the education of tens of thousands of people in the future.
If anyone was hurt or offended by what happened- I sincerely apologize.
P.S- I was mainly nervous because of the time pressure approaching. Winning the tournament was never one of our original goals, and to be frank, we didn't think we'd have a chance since we played so slowly and without breserking.
P.P.S- All the people who threaten to retract your donations or promise not to play on the site under certain conditions- Shame on you. Feel free to state it privately to the site managers, but don't be so conceited as if this amazing community (that'll be free and continue improving forever) owes you something just because you donated or supported it in the past, and you want them to Accede to your selfish needs. There'll be problems, and many disagreements in the future, and they'll be solved with love rather than force. Your best measure to make a difference is your opinion and arguments, and not your Name/Money/Pride.
Lichess isn't the patrons' customer, and it owes it's loyalty only to the game of chess and it's values, under the microscope of common sense.
EDIT: All those who claim 2 versus 1 is unfair I agree.
Those who claim it's giving an incredible advantage because 1+1=2 and 2X1=2>1 and 2:1=2 and pose all these mathematical arguments clearly didn't experience it themselves nor watched the stream in question. I'm not defending the principle of it being unfair. However, it's hard to imagine that your entire life is compromised just because one streamer, in a specific event with no prizes, played a game with another lower rated streamer(it goes without saying that the one who plays is the higher rated and the "owner" of the account) talking in the background, and every now and then suggests a variation while looking and responding to the chat which is at least with 15 seconds delay (and avoids mentioning moves from the chat), all under time pressure- is granting them an undeniable path to world domination. Potentially tens of thousands of people will watch, and it'll be stressed in the title and several times during the stream that it's illegal and special permission was granted. IMO there is much more educational and entertainment value for the viewers.
That being said, if a site decides to approve such a thing while streaming, under very specific conditions, to specific people who meet some criterions, where the educational value might exceed the harm, and the harm is only to those who care more about the win rather than having fun and improve- Then I'll definitely consider streaming in this fashion in the future, but only with the explicit permission of both the site AND the community.
On a positive note: The harm was relatively small and now we have a healthy discussion on an extremly important topic, that'll most probably affect the education of tens of thousands of people in the future.
If anyone was hurt or offended by what happened- I sincerely apologize.
P.S- I was mainly nervous because of the time pressure approaching. Winning the tournament was never one of our original goals, and to be frank, we didn't think we'd have a chance since we played so slowly and without breserking.
P.P.S- All the people who threaten to retract your donations or promise not to play on the site under certain conditions- Shame on you. Feel free to state it privately to the site managers, but don't be so conceited as if this amazing community (that'll be free and continue improving forever) owes you something just because you donated or supported it in the past, and you want them to Accede to your selfish needs. There'll be problems, and many disagreements in the future, and they'll be solved with love rather than force. Your best measure to make a difference is your opinion and arguments, and not your Name/Money/Pride.
Lichess isn't the patrons' customer, and it owes it's loyalty only to the game of chess and it's values, under the microscope of common sense.
EDIT: All those who claim 2 versus 1 is unfair I agree.
Those who claim it's giving an incredible advantage because 1+1=2 and 2X1=2>1 and 2:1=2 and pose all these mathematical arguments clearly didn't experience it themselves nor watched the stream in question. I'm not defending the principle of it being unfair. However, it's hard to imagine that your entire life is compromised just because one streamer, in a specific event with no prizes, played a game with another lower rated streamer(it goes without saying that the one who plays is the higher rated and the "owner" of the account) talking in the background, and every now and then suggests a variation while looking and responding to the chat which is at least with 15 seconds delay (and avoids mentioning moves from the chat), all under time pressure- is granting them an undeniable path to world domination. Potentially tens of thousands of people will watch, and it'll be stressed in the title and several times during the stream that it's illegal and special permission was granted. IMO there is much more educational and entertainment value for the viewers.
I can not believe how people get worked about this. Let's stick to the facts:
There will probably never more than 3-4 streams at one time. The only streams where players consult with each other are the chessbrah channel and the chessjuice channel on twitch. These channels both feature strong titled players that try to entertain and often play on lichess.
Everybody against streamer teams in here tries to argue that this will lead to the complete downfall of the quality of chess here and make cheating a commodity. I would argue that 99,9% of players here play on their computer while sitting alone in their room. The most common form of cheating is still using computer assistance.
I do not think that online tournaments which do not offer any prices are so important to warrant the outcry of a few players here, that this team stream play will have a really bad effect on the site. A way around this would be to create special tournaments where team play is allowed for the instances where streamer teams are interested in playing as a team. Me personally I find streamer teams very amusing and do not see it as such a big problem. When I see in what rude fashion Kingcrusher accused the player Amadan a few months ago of cheating, I am pretty sure he of all people should not be pointing the finger.
My proposed solution. Only allow streamers to play as team. Do not allow them to play in "important" tournaments. Mark their account as a Team Account. Maybe only allow them unrated games when playing as a team. There should be enough players willing to play against titled players / streamers.
There will probably never more than 3-4 streams at one time. The only streams where players consult with each other are the chessbrah channel and the chessjuice channel on twitch. These channels both feature strong titled players that try to entertain and often play on lichess.
Everybody against streamer teams in here tries to argue that this will lead to the complete downfall of the quality of chess here and make cheating a commodity. I would argue that 99,9% of players here play on their computer while sitting alone in their room. The most common form of cheating is still using computer assistance.
I do not think that online tournaments which do not offer any prices are so important to warrant the outcry of a few players here, that this team stream play will have a really bad effect on the site. A way around this would be to create special tournaments where team play is allowed for the instances where streamer teams are interested in playing as a team. Me personally I find streamer teams very amusing and do not see it as such a big problem. When I see in what rude fashion Kingcrusher accused the player Amadan a few months ago of cheating, I am pretty sure he of all people should not be pointing the finger.
My proposed solution. Only allow streamers to play as team. Do not allow them to play in "important" tournaments. Mark their account as a Team Account. Maybe only allow them unrated games when playing as a team. There should be enough players willing to play against titled players / streamers.
"Accede to your selfish needs."
Quite a combative thing to say. My needs are pretty simple. I need to play on a site that has fair rules that don't allow collusion during rated games. How selfish of me.
Quite a combative thing to say. My needs are pretty simple. I need to play on a site that has fair rules that don't allow collusion during rated games. How selfish of me.
The fact that TalBaron asked permission for this is fine. I have no issue with him and the IM doing the dual commentary/working together during the tournament after being given permission.
The real issue is that they were given permission from Thibault in the first place. Chess is a 1 vs 1 game. If one side is given unfair advantages (whether engine use, ability to consult a friend/database/etc.) then the fairness of the game is thrown off. I don't agree with consultation during a game being allowed at all. But at the very least, the opponent should be alerted that they are playing against a duo/team of players. That way maybe the person can get their own help during the game too? Otherwise the game wouldn't be fair/even.
Ultimately though, I don't agree with anything other than chess being 1 human vs 1 human
The real issue is that they were given permission from Thibault in the first place. Chess is a 1 vs 1 game. If one side is given unfair advantages (whether engine use, ability to consult a friend/database/etc.) then the fairness of the game is thrown off. I don't agree with consultation during a game being allowed at all. But at the very least, the opponent should be alerted that they are playing against a duo/team of players. That way maybe the person can get their own help during the game too? Otherwise the game wouldn't be fair/even.
Ultimately though, I don't agree with anything other than chess being 1 human vs 1 human
Im glad I dont play tournaments, they are corrupted,
I thought chess was an individual game and instead I find
mutual collaboration between the adversaries.
How can this be possible legit and sponsored by the site
its beyond me but its for sure a very bad policy.
because chess is about looking good moves alone
if you are looking for help you play in a team, then its not the
same anymore, its like cheating honestly because
its two people versus one.
Its a lack of respect towards the game where one plays alone
but if one does not understand this then I guess there is nothing
else to say, and to the opponent as well, lack of respect to the opponent because the opponent is putting his mind to the limit and trying to win
I mean chess is not like a normal game, every small detail counts
even tiny details, and by doing this you are making the game
and asshole fest, what is going to be next? 5 players versus one.
I thought chess was an individual game and instead I find
mutual collaboration between the adversaries.
How can this be possible legit and sponsored by the site
its beyond me but its for sure a very bad policy.
because chess is about looking good moves alone
if you are looking for help you play in a team, then its not the
same anymore, its like cheating honestly because
its two people versus one.
Its a lack of respect towards the game where one plays alone
but if one does not understand this then I guess there is nothing
else to say, and to the opponent as well, lack of respect to the opponent because the opponent is putting his mind to the limit and trying to win
I mean chess is not like a normal game, every small detail counts
even tiny details, and by doing this you are making the game
and asshole fest, what is going to be next? 5 players versus one.
Bunch of moaning bastards..
Precisely. I'm tempted to donate some money just because that whiner had to mention he cancelled his patronage. Next time you all play, guys, you have to make sure you lock the door to your room, in case your family comes in and starts recommending moves. Ridiculous. If this tournament was moneyed, I'd have a problem with it. I don't agree with a pattern of two players playing in conference unmarked, but it isn't a reason to forsake the entire website for one incongruity in yours and the creator's idea of what's fair, because he condoned this. It isn't for anything other than imaginary rating points, and imaginary tournament points. Maybe, if you're lucky, it's for an imaginary trophy on your profile. It's an overreaction. Lapses in how any system should work occur.
You have a point. We'll see when this use case comes up.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.