Speed Records and "Cheating"

[Dunderchief]

Still waiting for someone to explain how this cheating takes place. To me, the sad part is that the players who are not as fast or competent assume that anyone better or faster than themselves is cheating. If you do not have an answer as to how cheating is occurring, please refrain from making accusations.

You mischaracterize compuspud and others -- they are not saying ANYONE better or faster is cheating, but certain individuals must be as their times/scores don't seem possible.

Take yourself for example: over 1048 games this month you have an average score of 779, where highest possible is 800. This score over this many puzzles is not remotely possible in a random selection of puzzles that includes longer and harder puzzles. I think I know what you are doing, which is to keep hitting the "Play" button until you get an easy puzzle. Is that "cheating"? Well, I say no because the game itself lets you do it. But it isn't straight play either, where you play whatever puzzle you get by the random selection.

I wish Admin would disable this ability for anyone playing in "competitive" mode. I have said this before. It would eliminate most of what people are calling "cheeating" and it would go a long way towards making the scores straightforward. (However, if someone is playing NOT in competitive mode, especially newbies, let them keep this option while they are learning.)

As to other "cheating" schemes, I also take issue with your assertion that no one should mention it w/o showing how the cheat is occurring. Non-computer geeks would not have a clue, but still have circumstantial evidence of at least irregularities. "Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.". Henry David Thoreau. So I for one am keeping an open mind, although it might just be that some have found other tricks or techniques allowed by the game to enhance their performance. Also some have worked an unbelievable (to me) number of puzzles and might just recognize far more clue answers than the average solver finding the puzzle cold.

I am one of the original players on this sight way back in 2012. I am still in the top 100 all-time list, although I have slipped all the way down to 74th bcz I quit playing in competition mode a long time ago, bcz the scores stopped being meaningful but yet I am too competitive a person to ignore them and was therefore spending more time on this game than I really wanted to. But I know what I am doing here. Thus I empathize w/compuspud and others who say that something "fishy" is going on here!

[hootmon]

Still waiting for someone to explain how this cheating takes place. To me, the sad part is that the players who are not as fast or competent assume that anyone better or faster than themselves is cheating. If you do not have an answer as to how cheating is occurring, please refrain from making accusations.

[compuspud]

What's really sad is that some people have to cheat on a simple game. They have no pride, honesty or class.

[PatienceCrabstick]

Today — March 7 — our Kellnerin set (at least) another 6 all-time speed records in a single 18-minute span. Quite a feat if these records were honestly come by, but the odds of that are vanishingly small.

[PatienceCrabstick]

A minimum of 6 records in a row, accomplished in a 50-minute span, and then a minimum of 5 records in a row, accomplished in a 29-minute span. Certainly it’s possible that they’re all honestly come by, but as we all know “possible” and “probable” are two very different things. The very strong probability here is that the way the records were earned was less than ideal.

[hootmon]

If you believe it’s a duck, please explain. Otherwise your comment will be seen as jealousy. Yes she is very fast. I just admire her skill

[PatienceCrabstick]

This morning our Kellnerin set at least 5 new speed records, all in a 29-minute span. It walks like a duck and quacks like a duck ...

[PatienceCrabstick]

I should add that it’s at least six fastest-ever puzzles — as the little drop-down box shows only six results. The actual number may be quite higher. Something fishy is going on ...

[PatienceCrabstick]

For those conspiracy theorists out there, there’s some interesting activity this morning. A user named Kellnerin set no less than SIX fastest-ever records between 9:01 and 9:51 AM. That’s right — six all-time bests in just 50 minutes. Of course, this kind of thing is possible — but it’s also highly suspicious.

[compuspud]

And don't forget the plyer who has solved one more puzzle than they played!

[latourelljl]

The math doesn't add up either. 1500+ games at an average of 143 seconds. That's over 60 hours of playing at a record pace with no failed puzzles. No way.

[Phidel]

I believe that there is some way that people (Svenska for example) are cheating, for what reason I can't imagine, but it would be almost physically impossible for even the fastest of typists to fill in the solution as quickly as the results that these people claim.

[2cute]

I wish there was a section for the expert players and a section for the less experienced players. Then I would have a chance to ever beat a score. I'm never going to find a 28 letter word. I'm lucky if I can come up with 7 or 8 letters. Mostly I only find 5 or 6. It would be nice to beat another person's score and hold a record for a while. While I know if I spent 8+ hours a day 7 days a week, maybe I could improve, but I'm never going to do that either. I like to do other things with my life. Still, it would be nice if there were 2 sections. Then I could beat a score at least every once in a while.

[Guru]

Pretty much wrote off the "scoring" here as strictly PR abstract designed to keep the 'members' interested (if not happy). When something like that is not (or cannot be) explained on the site, it's already dubious (strike 1). When the scores between playing logged in (low) and playing not logged in (high) have such glaring discrepancies...can anyone pronounce BAIT & SWITCH ? (strike 2). When the "fire & forget aspect" of the site are made patently clear by the lack of ADMIN involvement/oversight/response to reported problems (e.g., puzzles with no clues) (strike 3). We're out...in the cold. I play the puzzles the same way I pursue other hobbies: because I enjoy it and (if applicable) to beat my 'latest best'.

[scitsorca]

I am very confused about how this "scoring" works. As I said before, I don't log on, or try to do things quickly, I'm out of that loop, I just saw this discussion on the side and was interested. If a puzzle is newly posted, where do those statistics come from, and do they keep changing? New puzzle, first person plays, the "statistics" consist of only one person's results until others play it too. If the statistics are taken from the "competition" players who are logged in, then they'll always be skewed if the outliers (the super-quick being discussed here) are included. Won't they?

(BTW, maybe I'm peculiar, but I find long(er) puzzles easier. If it's a short puzzle and you don't know the answers, you've got fewer chances to figure something out by thinking about it.)