Maybe the thought is that if 11,000 people cheat, that you can be the lucky individual that gets away with it?
At that point it seems more like poor course design than anything else. I am also sure a lot of those people just followed the herd without intention to cheat, just believing that they were running the course as it was set up. That’s still a disqualification because you are responsible to know the course and follow it, but there is still a good part that falls on the race planners.
The article suggests its more rampant cheating. Lots of vehicle usage and such.
The article is very poorly written in that regard.
Marca reported Monday that the runners were disqualified after missing checkpoints that were placed every 5 kilometers. Some runners allegedly used vehicles or public transport to cut the course.
“Some runners allegedly used vehicles”. How many of those 11,000 is “some”? Is it 5, 50, or 5000? Very flexible terms here.
Lots of reporting by ESPN on Biogenesis:
I’ve only started reading it, but there is a ton of material here.
Instead, anywhere from 0.2% to 0.5% of people are managing to pull off a first-turn win in Wordle’s normal mode, with Dilger converting that to between 4,000 and 10,000 players based on Wordle’s 1.7 million daily users.
It’s a small number of people, but this type of behavior is a huge problem. Some people, for some unknown reason, gain satisfaction simply from the indicator that they are a winner rather than actually being a winner and accomplishing something.
Imagine if I went to the Tour de France with a motorcycle and they actually gave me the yellow jersey. This isn’t a situation where I still put in a lot of my own efforts and just used PEDs to get a boost. I straight up did nothing. No work, no accomplishment, no nothing. How could I possibly feel like a winner? I’d feel more like a winner if I rode it myself and came in last place. Just finishing even one stage legitimately would feel better since it’s so difficult.
What kind of mind does a person have where their joy is derived from a picture on the computer monitor saying “You Win!” even though that visual indicator is completely detached from reality.
1 Like
Self-delusion is a powerful drug. “But, I have all these indicators that I am a winner, I can’t possibly be a loser!” Self-delusion, possibly reinforced by sharing such accomplishments on social media to seek praise and/or status?
I would be curious to read a psychological study of such people.
This is an interesting tidbit:
That’s been my experience, once I decide to cheat in a game (Game Genie, dev console commands, modifying the javascript of a web game, etc…) I often lose interest very quickly, though it depends on the nature of the cheat. If it is just extra lives (more likely to keep playing the game for a while) vs can’t be killed or something along those lines (almost immediately lose interest after seeing the ending or whatever obstacle I could not get past).
This is weird to me from all angles. I haven’t played Wordle in a while, but NYT hasn’t dramatically changed it, right?
It’s a single player game. Who was “cheated”? Who do these people “beat”?
What are the “cheaters” getting out of it? Just a line of 5 green emoji squares?
Exactly. For some reason simply having the “trophy”, even though it’s just a number on a screen is enough for them.
Worlde got big enough for social clout/effects from your wordle diagrams and time to solve. Thats probably the main driver.
I am surprised that the subject of Billy Mitchell hasn’t come up in this thread yet. Mitchell is best known as a supposed record holder for Donkey Kong and was prominently featured in the 2007 documentary “King of Kong”. In the documentary he is kind of cast as a villain so the documentary could be seen as a bit biased, but his personality, haircut and the way he dresses does him no favor here.
Since the documentary almost all of his records have come into question with strong evidence that his submitted record tapes were all produced using emulator software, which is not permitted as per the official record keepers. Billy has since gone into legal warfare suing basically anybody who is putting serious doubt on his “records”.
This very long video goes into a lot of detail on the issue. I’ve watched it in smaller chunks because I can’t just go for four hours straight. I also didn’t really like the intro it had. However, the rest of the video is fascinating in dismantling this guy.
He never passed the sniff test even before I was aware of how obviously he’s cheated.
The thing is, it’s not like the dude sucks at Donkey Kong. He’s not some kid who cheats at FPS with aimbot. He just cheated to save time and get over the final threshold. If he had just put in the work to get it legitimately, it would have worked out for him.
But no. His personality, but also his clear intent to seek fame and fortune, were dead giveaways that something wasn’t right. Even before it was well known that he cheated, I was never a fan of his. He never made himself someone that you felt good rooting for.
Meanwhile you got the speedrunners over here. They’ll play some game where RNG ruins 4/5 runs 30 minutes in, and just reset and go again. Hours, days, months, whatever it takes to finally get it legit. And then when they get it, no expectation of reward outside of the congrats from within the community. It was all about the friends they made along the way.
Billy Mitchell is that guy, and nobody decent wants to be his friend, cheater or not.
1 Like
I’ve recently started to watch Karl Jobst’s content. He is a YouTuber who goes after cheaters such as Mitchell. His titles are a bit sensationalist but he has good motives and does good work and part of his work is featured in the above video. He has a saying that in speedrunning “cheaters don’t try to get a faster time, cheaters try to get a time faster”.
To cheat successfully, you have to know the game very well. Otherwise discrepancies will show up quickly on the radar of people who know more than you do and the larger the pool of those people is the quicker you are exposed.
Billy Mitchell is a very good player and has demonstrated himself to be capable of reaching those scores in apparently legitimate efforts, but these scores are inadmissible due to his previous cheating, and even if they were they are nowadays a far cry from World Record pace. There is also a regular competition (or at least was pre-pandemic) called Kong Off where the best players meet to play in person. The best I could find for Billy was a 3rd place in 2019, though he won the Australian offshoot that same year which apparently didn’t feature that stiff competition as others.
Mitchell is a good player, but he is far from the best, but since his personality is seemingly entirely based around trying to put forth a veneer of greatness it is eating him alive.
2 Likes
That’s perfect.
At first I thought of the other Billy Mitchell, had to check what thread we’re in.
his temporary appointment as a brigadier general was not renewed, and he reverted to his permanent rank of colonel, due to his insubordination. Later that year, he was court-martialed for insubordination after accusing Army and Navy leaders of an “almost treasonable administration of the national defense” for investing in warships.
1 Like
I had been somewhat aware of and following Karl Jobst a bit for his Goldeneye speedrunning, before his content shifted more to the recent mode of exposing cheaters and the like within the speedrun scene (as well as outside of it with things like the retro game grading racket and the recent Completionist issues) and so I appreciate that his experience comes from directly earning world record runs in a competitive speedrunning scene and isn’t just a commentator covering drama from the sidelines. He knows what the grind is and has the mindset well understood and can also empathize in some way with why these skilled people will still sometimes cheat. So whatever he says feels like it carries a little extra scorn and disappointment.
Some commenters on the Internet pointed out something that’s quite simple, and I couldn’t think of an answer.
Why aren’t the high level chess matches just being played inside of Faraday cages at this point?
The only kind of cheating that would be meaningful amongst such high level players requires a computer. There’s no way a cheater can bring such a computer to the table and get away with it. That can be solved with a basic metal detector screening and pat-down. If someone out there can fit a battery AND a computer AND a vibrator up their ass, there are other jobs besides chess they should be considering.
Therefore, the only realistic technological solution at this time, is to carry a receiver and for the computer to be elsewhere. If the player is inside a cage, no signals can reach them. Let them bring in all the receivers they want, it won’t do them any good.
Just about every eSports competition puts the players into booths so that no outside information can reach them. Chess is way more prestigious and there’s a lot more attention on it. For the ultra high level tournaments, shove all those grandmasters into booths. If they don’t like it, well, then they can stop making cheating accusations, and also forfeit.
Chess has a history of letting you do whatever, as long as you have time on the clock. A couple world championships ago, Nepomniatchi kept leaving the board during matches.
I bet they want to preserve that. Would really cramp your style to be locked in a tiny box if you’re used to being able to wander.
Chess also has a history of the very top guys taking their ball and going home, I wonder if the best players just wouldn’t agree to it.
Too bad.
If cheating accusations are flying about, then anyone who won’t submit to anti-cheating measures is assumed to be cheating. If you have to disqualify all the top players, then so be it. Whoever can win inside the box is the real champ in my eyes.
I’m sure there are enough resources available that it doesn’t have to be a literal metal cage. It could be a very nice lounge with food and beverage and restrooms and such. It will just be in a basement or a vault or something where no signals can get through the walls.
If someone leaves, then we can consider that a forfeit.
1 Like