About cheaters in CoC


Since the emergence of AI, we can obviously notice that there are more and more cheaters in CoC.
There are actually two kind of cheaters :

def create_number_box(x, y):
    box = []
    num = 1
    for i in range(x // y):
        row = []
        for j in range(y):
            num += 1
    return box

# Entrée : x = 6, y = 2
x = int(input())
y = int(input())

# Appel de la fonction pour créer la boîte de nombres
number_box = create_number_box(x, y)

# Affichage du résultat
for row in number_box:
    print(' '.join(str(num) for num in row))
  • Those which copy/paste the solution form the dashboard “Contributions > Validated CoC” by searching by the author’s name

Actually, it kills the spirit of the developers and will kill the CoC.
What is your position and what do you plan to fight against cheaters ?


It’s very frustrating.

I was just in a clash with user neohr71 in which they submitted in 25 seconds for a puzzle that was not hard, but took at least 20 seconds to understand and then minimum 30 seconds to code (even for an absurdly fast coder).

Clash: Coding Games and Programming Challenges to Code Better


It would be nice to have these users’ code checked for cheating, but it’s rare that they would share after cheating (this user didn’t).

1 Like

I can confirm the same user having submitted in less than 1 minute a solution whereas all the other were at more that 10 minutes.


i just had the exact same problem :slightly_smiling_face:

a user who pasted this in 44s :
(no doubt : the automatic code is deleted, and this one is with comments)

import re

line = input()

# Remove the comments from the line
line = re.sub(r'/\*.*?\*/', '', line)

# Count the number of digital characters
count = sum(1 for char in line if char.isdigit())


did you have any other answers, like from the staff ?

1 Like

Another likely cheater, user Derbazi_Mokhtar, submitted the below code in 50 seconds to a problem about abbreviating phrases in ‘< >’.

import re
message = input()
def replace_match(match):
    words = match.group(1).split()
    acronym = "".join(word[0] for word in words)
    return acronym
abbreviated_message = re.sub(r"<(.*?)>", replace_match, message)

Seems pretty obviously generated by ChatGPT to me, because no speed-coder is going to define a fully-named function for such a purpose, and long, descriptive variable names and still submit in 50 seconds.


there is more and more … and hiding their solutions

1 Like

Another likely cheater, user RabilliGanesh , submitted hidden code in 49 seconds to a problem about determining whether an input integer value of note could be evenly changed for made from other integer-valued notes given in the input. Some cases required you to solve for situations where none of the notes evenly divided the number, but combinations could.

Seems likely that a 49 second solution is from cheating, to me, but it’s not 100% sure.



Another likely cheater, user PondZA, submitted hidden code in 43 seconds to a problem of finding the area of a polygon given all it’s coordinates (shoelace formula needed, but never mentioned in the text).

I know the formula nearly by-heart now, but it still took me 2.5 minutes to code up. I highly doubt any human coded the shoelace formula in 43 seconds (not to mention the time to read the problem).


New cheater “Rigwild” has been completing hard problems in less than 20s. Has to be a bot. They were here last week completing them in just slightly faster than I could (Rank 500 in CoC) which was frustrating, but now it is back and not even trying to seem like they are not a bot. Please fix this, I love CoC! But I hate this bot Lol.


Yeah, bot rigwild has to die. Solved a reverse clash in 2 seconds and off to the next one!


Yes I agree, Bot Rigwild is actively killing the CoC (seen a submission in 3 seconds). You can see on his profile that “he’s cheating” and on its github you found the codingame-bot. Lost some dozens of places in Coc

1 Like

I reported Rigwild yesterday - a user that actually ADMITS to cheating on their profile. Let´s hope the moderation team do something about it. Cheating doesn’t get more blantent than this.


Please ask CG staff directly. Community moderators aren’t able to do anything about it.

1 Like

Bro’s a menace ! where was he when Y2K happened ?

I’ve completely switched to code golfing ever since I noticed that people are posting solutions with full comments and function names. My favorite case is when, for some simple task (in Python, taking around 45 seconds to solve the problem, I don’t remember exactly, something like Fibonacci), someone posted a solution in 30 seconds with full variable names in C++ xd.

1 Like

Hello guys. Today I came across someone who was clearly using ChatGPT in CoC to win them. Should he/she be banned? One thing is using it after the other users have finished it, another is using it to win.

P.S.: The code even had comments like “#Separating the letters in a word” while he finished it in like 30 seconds. I mean, if you finish everything and also comment easy stuff like this in 30 sec shout-out to you but it seems obvious that it was AI. The profile of the guy is: Coding Games and Programming Challenges to Code Better

I couldn’t report him idk why

Same here, i can’t report for abuse >w<

As a suggestion for improvement/punishing behavior:

  • The first person who solves a clash of code - must share their code (you cannot hide if you are first)
  • to have a button in CoC - ‘I consider it’s cheating’ and if 60% of participants of the clash clicked on it => ignore this person result.
  • introduce public metric - “trust” level for user profile (basically if trust if low - than if anyone consider this person cheater - it will void its result, and if trust is high - you need more people to “accuse”). Also we need idea how to recover someone, if this person once cheated but 99% time he plays fair play.

Basically we cannot protect from occasional cheating, but if someone systematically cheating - i think it should be reflected on profile (not somewhere in forum :))

1 Like

Oh lord ! i love cheaters. the amount of stupid and brainrot. Sadly they keep getting away with it :smiling_face_with_tear:

check ouzema using some LIDL type of AI :rofl: :rofl:

1 Like

Sad to see that the CodinGame-sanctioned bot JayEm94 has now started using a cheaters solution for a new puzzle. (JayEm94 is one of the site’s own bots that uses code from past clashes as its own solution, but usually isn’t submitting code that would win).

It sucks that it submitted winning code that was clearly submitted by someone using AI. Here’s the link to the clash and a a screenshot of the bot’s winning code that was submitted in 1m29.

It’s bad enough for players to be submitting AI-generated code, but when the site’s bots end up winning clashes by using some past player’s AI-generated code, it’s even more annoying…

Three others I’ve noticed also:
36 seconds for a challenge that was about the k’s complement of n. Not simple, but if you know it well it’s possible to do in 2-3 minutes. Didn’t share code

27 seconds to solve printing the index (1-indexed) and the size of the longest string of 1’s in a binary input string, space-separated. Long description talked of “hills”, took at least 15 seconds to understand the problem even skim-reading (took me ~50 seconds to read). Seems unlikely to solve the problem in the remaining 12 seconds for 27 seconds total… Didn’t share code.

This player cheated using ChatGPT most likely.

Submitted a solution in 28 seconds to a clash that took at least 1 minute to read/understand and then at least 1 minute to code. Only ranked level 2 at the time of the clash (added this as an edit to this comment on 4-Feb-24)