I HAVE ABANDONED THE ENDGAME AI

Rating Difference

Below is my comment on Discord, Engame AI:

There is a major flaw in the rating difference system of the Endgame AI. 

I guess that it is not a computer program bug but a conceptual mistake.

The rating difference can be set for the lobby so that the player does not see challenges that do not meet the player’s criteria. 

Unfortunately, this does not apply to challenges that the player creates themselves.

Thus, if I set the rating range -300…+300, everyone with a rating of -500 can still see and accept my challenge.

It does not make much sense because if I want to avoid players with a rating difference of -500, then I do not care who made the challenge.

Moreover, when others issue a challenge, the player can see the challenger's rating in the lobby and decide whether to accept it. 

That is, the rating difference works where it is not urgently needed and does not work where it is necessary.

Usually, the rating difference or rating range is set symmetrically to both the challenges of others and the player's own challenges.

I have stopped playing on the Endgame AI, too

It has happened twice on the Endgame AI: when I achieve a rating above 1900, two players with very low ratings in a row accept my challenge and beat me, significantly reducing my rating. Remarkably, such players with very low ratings have played very-very fast and precisely, so that I have been entitled to suspect that either they used a chess engine or they were anonymous top-grandmasters. 

I cannot speculate on the conspiracy theory that such targeted attacks have been organised by the chess platform itself. 

However, the platform has a feature that the rating range the player has set does not apply to the challenges the player is doing himself, which is obviously a weird feature that increases the possibility of such manipulations. 

In the case of the FIDE Online Arena, they even dared to punish the players who “too often” cancelled the games. “Too often” cancelling the game actually meant that the player’s challenges were too often accepted by known cheaters with low ratings. 

Anyway, I have stopped playing on the Endgame AI now, too. That new platform claims to be making great innovations in online chess. However, what I see are the same mistakes I have seen on several other platforms.

LICHESS IS FULL OF CHEATERS

I will stop playing on Lichess because, over the past few days, more than half of my opponents have used a chess engine (either occasionally or for the entire game), and Lichess seems unable to do anything about it.

PS

Then, I tried to play again on the FIDE Online Arena. As they announced, they had given me back some rating points I had lost against the cheaters.

It is nonsense. They gave me back the rating points of one or two games, while there have been tens of reported cheaters.

Moreover, they have awarded grandmaster titles (AGM) to some of these players who cheat in every game, from start to finish. They are simply mocking people.

Then I played a couple of games there, and again someone managed to make 24 very precise moves in 2 minutes, in a tactically complicated, unknown position.

I do not understand why they call it an online chess arena owned by FIDE. 

MY LAST FIDE ONLINE ARENA UNFAIR PLAY REPORTS

Since May 2026, I have been an Arena International Master (AIM) in online chess. However, there are nuances.

I shall stop playing on FIDE Online Arena (FOA) and the site Worldchess.

Below are my latest unfair play reports that I have sent.

&&&

NN is very probably using a chess engine. In a 10 + 10 rapid game (39 moves), NN was disconnected several times in the middle of the game. NN used only 1 min 56 sec of thinking time, while NN’s performance was impossibly perfect: accuracy 0.99, average centipawn loss 2, inaccuracies 0.

&&&

NN is one such player who repeatedly offers a draw against players with a higher ELO. If the draw is rejected, NN takes a long pause. After that, NN plays abnormally fast and precisely as an altogether different player. I am pretty sure that a chess engine was in use.

&&&

NN – I think his games should be checked. I won him, but I think he is playing abnormally fast and precisely. In a 10 + 10 rapid game (47 moves), NN played astronomically fast: every single move was made using the time increment only. NN’s final thinking time is seriously negative: - 1 min 53 sec. Despite a very high speed, NN’s statistics are unbelievably good: accuracy 90%, average centipawn loss 15. When I played at normal speed, NN made only 1 inaccurate move. All the other inaccurate moves and mistakes NN made in a simple technical endgame, when I played extremely fast due to the Zeitnot. I suspect that NN (AFM!) is playing with the chess engine, and when the opponent plays very fast, he does not have time to read the chess engine's screen or thinks it is unnecessary. Thank you.

&&&

NN is very probably using a chess engine during a live game. In a 10 + 10 rapid game (53 moves), NN played at an astronomical pace. During the whole of the game, NN’s thinking time was negative. There were only some rare occasions when NN did not use the time increment only. At the end of the game, NN’s thinking time was seriously negative: - 1 min 29 sec. Despite a very high speed, there were long sequences of precise moves that NN made almost instantly. The statistics are also unbelievable: accuracy 0.91, average centipawn loss 15 (or 0.19). Inaccuracies 3 (or 5), mistakes 2 (or 3), blunders 0 (or 1). However, if we do not count the opening moves, it turns out that most of NN’s inaccuracies were practically the best moves to try to win, as White was in a Zeitnot and these moves were the only options to avoid very drawish endgames. 

I will stop playing on Worldchess because there are far too many cheaters, and Worldchess is far too slow to take them down. I cannot spend the rest of my life writing unfair play reports every single day, which seem useless anyway.

&&&

These were my last 4 unfair play reports. 

There are cheaters on every chess platform, and I have abandoned many of them.

The FOA is particularly peculiar. It is FIDE’s official gaming platform. However, no video cameras are used. The players cannot be blocked. One cannot set the rating difference for challenges. 

To obtain the title, one must play in tournaments, where one meets players with low ratings who use chess engines. It rather looks like the system wants you to play against the cheaters and tries to obstruct you if you try to avoid them.

Sometimes the system finally recovers your rating points, but you have already lost the chance to obtain the title, and the system does not restore that chance. You have to start everything all over again.

Worse. To obtain the title of, say, AGM, one has to be successful against those who already have the title of AGM or AIM. Unfortunately, the FOA has given such titles to several such players whose statistical data force one to conclude that, with very high probability, they are chess engine users. Their statistics are so astronomically perfect that I guess an ordinary OTB grandmaster would have little chance of beating them without using a chess engine.

All this not only makes it very difficult for a strong but honest player to obtain FOA's higher titles, but also makes such titles worthless. 

My fresh AIM title is worthless because the general background is such that people simply do not believe that I am not also a cheater - a player who uses a chess engine in live online games.

Such a title might even compromise my reputation. 

Some rating points restored

After a while, I tried to play again on the FIDE Online Arena. As they announced, they had given me back some rating points I had lost against the cheaters.

It is nonsense. They gave me back the rating points of one or two games, while there have been tens of reported cheaters.

Moreover, they have awarded grandmaster titles (AGM) to some of these players who cheat in every game, from start to finish. They are simply mocking people.

Then I played a couple of games there, and again someone managed to make 24 very precise moves in 2 minutes, in a tactically complicated, unknown position.

I really do not understand why they call it an online chess arena owned by FIDE. 

The availability of the FIDE title

So I cancelled my FIDE Online Arena subscription.

But the crazy mess in that office (I could write 10 pages about it, but I really don't feel like it) is endless.

Immediately, I got the following message:

Your subscription will end on November 25, 2026.
You won't be charged again

FIDE titles and ID will no longer be available after your subscription ends.

Screenshot of the Worldchess pop-up message

Such a blackmailing, ambiguous text was seen in the temporary pop-up window that opened immediately after I cancelled my subscription. I also received an official email, but it did not contain any such warnings or threats. Plausible deniability. This is their style. 

But here's a problem. Namely, they have previously announced that these titles are given for life. In addition, I have already downloaded my title certificate (after technical problems, it was finally successful).

All their information is inaccurate from beginning to end, and in this case - in the case of title availability -, it seems to be a scare tactic that if you don't pay at least 50 euros a year, you will lose your title or will no longer be able to use it effectively.

This title is here:

The availability of the FIDE ID

There are also problems with the availability of the FIDE ID. Actually, that ID does not belong to the Worldchess or even to the FIDE Online Arena. It belongs to the FIDE. It has also not been announced earlier that this ID depends on paying the subscription forever.

Note that the International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF) keeps the player’s ID permanently, regardless of whether the player continues to belong to the player’s national federation and pays the fees. Only tournament fees are applied if needed. 

Discrediting FIDE as a crime

Finally, Worldchess has clearly informed all users that if they damage Worldchess' reputation, their account may be closed. Along with the warning that if they do not pay, they will no longer be able to get their title, it is impressive.

In their news, they are currently boasting that the Russian Chess Federation has been suspended from FIDE in relation to Russia's war against Ukraine.

In this regard, an analogy came to mind.

In Russia, Putin banned the discrediting of the Russian Army. As a result, in Russia, people who speak out about Russian war crimes are being imprisoned.

Similarly, Worldchess has banned the discrediting of Worldchess. As a result, those who publicly state that their consumer rights have been violated may not be able to play chess there.

And, as it turns out, according to the warning, they may no longer get their well-deserved title or FIDE ID. 

Support feedback

Finally, the support answered my email and said that the pop-up window claimed that the player without a valid subscription cannot get new FOA titles. 

However, the pop-up window contained two obscure warnings. The support did not answer my second question concerning the second warning. It did not answer the question of in what sense exactly the FIDE ID is no longer available if the subscription is cancelled. 

Instead, I got a second letter which thanked me for my critical notes, as if they had already answered my questions, which they did not.

The main problem with the Worldchess and the FIDE Online Arena is that, from the very beginning, they have consistently avoided answering certain questions, pretending they had. 

It is pretty absurd that I finally cancelled my subscription, and even here, they managed to create several new problems.

MY ANSWER TO THE "QUESTION" CONCERNING KRAMNIK, NARODITSKY, AND FIDE

On the Chess Stack Exchange, a strange question was asked:

"Kramnik referral to FIDE Ethics Commission regarding Naroditsky"

I was technically unable to comment on it, therefore, I published my comment to that "question" as an "answer". As a result, my reply might be converted to a comment, perhaps with some technical distortions.

Therefore, I shall publish my comment here as a copy (see below). 

The page as it stands right now has also been saved on the Wayback Machine. 

The Question is Badly Formulated

The question is badly formulated, and I have flagged it.

All questions have some presuppositions. In the present case, the number of presuppositions has not been minimised, and the assumptions made have not been proven or are wrong.

Therefore, the post pretends to be a question but reads more like a poorly justified accusation.

The "question" starts with the following accusation:

"After Naroditsky's sudden death at age 29 following repeated allegations of online cheating by Kramnik..."

No reference is given to support that accusation. Moreover, we can read the recent article from Reuters:

"Chess - Kramnik files complaint over online threats after Naroditsky's death", Reuters, 26 October 2025.

It is partly behind the paywall, but it has been summed up in the following article:

"Former world chess champion Kramnik files complaint over online threats after Naroditsky's death", Asiaone, 27 October 2025

The relevant quotations are the following:

"Kramnik, who raised questions about possible cheating by Naroditsky and other players last year..."

"Naroditsky's name appeared on a list published by Kramnik last year of players showing unusually low blunder rates in the final seconds of online games.

Kramnik has denied accusing Naroditsky personally of cheating, saying his remarks were 'reasoned questions' based on statistical analysis."

As a presupposition of the question, also FIDE President Arkady Dvorkovich's statement on the FIDE website has been quoted.

That statement, however, associates GM Valdimir Kramnik with GM Daniel Naroditsky's death. At the moment, when that FIDE statement was published, the US police had not published a statement about the direct cause of Naroditsky's death. Only a few days later, the police announced that Naroditsky's death was being investigated as "a possible suicide or overdose".

Therefore, my answer to the "question" is that FIDE should first investigate whether its accusations are true and proven.

I also suggest that Chess Stack Exchange should not publish such "questions" which are actually public accusations of highly controversial issues.

Indeed, my comment was effectively deleted

It has been drastically shortened during the process of "converting" it from "answer" to "comment".

Notably, the "question" was asked by the user Brian Towers, and my comment was in effect deleted also by the user Brian Towers. 

According to Chess Stack Exchange, Brian Towers is a "moderator". I have flagged the propagandistic "question" but the system has not responded. Therefore, the weird "question" asked, which amounts to a part of the current larger smearing campaign, looks as if the official position of the Chess Stack Exchange. 

I will never forgive to that person who recommended me to try using Stack Exchange!