This attitude is a bit alien to me. At the level I play games (which is in the range of like 90% of gamers), my opponents are basically anonymous, and someone obviously cheating and someone smurfing has about the same effect of ruining the fun. The points mean nothing except maybe to measure my own improvement at the game. If someone's cheating and I can't tell them from the other players, I don't care.
If you can't fully connect your results in the game to your skill (because you can't trust if the others cheated), then you can't trust you are improving (or how to adapt to maybe improve).
On an evolutionary level, the purpose of play is to improve your skill in something in a tight, enjoyable feedback loop. Cheating messes with that.
Though your approach is preferable, I do think cheating (or more broadly, not trusting that you can learn how to improve with further play) kneecaps the whole point of playing.
(I'm badly presenting an idea I learned from Jonathan Blow re: how some game design ideas, such as opaque adaptive difficulty like rubberbanding found in racing games, destroys the purpose of playing)
I don’t think these subtle cheats make a big difference in matchmaking type games anyway. It could be finding cheat-enhanced bad players, or non-cheat-enhanced good players. If the cheats are subtle, who can tell the difference?
