Cheating and CFC involvement

[Rahul Gangolli]

I was at a tournament this weekend (Aurora) where a player 'withdrew' due to cheating. The other players were advised that cheaters would be dealt with in a number of ways including having their name sent to the CFC. What would the CFC do with this information? I am just curious. And does a tournament or tournament director have a right to bar a player or players if they have cheated in the past or have been suspected of cheating in the past?

[Mathieu Cloutier]

Re: Cheating and CFC involvement

I think it's almost impossible to prevent cheating. For example, some say the players should put their cell phones in a box at the venue's entrance. Pointless, I'll just drop a dummy phone and use the one I kept with me. And searching everyone either manually or with a metal detector is just too much trouble for too little return.

However, when somebody is caught red-handed, yes, I expect some form of punishement. Ban the guy from competitive chess for a certain time (1 year? more for repeated offenders). Remove some of his rating points etc.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Cheating and CFC involvement

Cheating in which way?

[Mathieu Cloutier]

Re: Cheating and CFC involvement

Cheating in which way?

I wasn't there, but I heard the guy did things that were... against the rules!! More specifically, he recieved some help from an external source. ;)

No really, I have no idea...

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Cheating and CFC involvement

There were two incidents of dishonest behavior during the Aurora Fall Open.

#1
A very young kid trying something that didn't work. The father and the TD found a suitable punishment by withdrawing him from the tournament and disciplining him at home.
#2
In the second incident a strict verbal warning was given,and before the next round the TD reminded everybody to play fair. The TD will notify the CFC of the matter. (That's why I will not provide any further details at this moment.)

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Cheating and CFC involvement

I was at a tournament this weekend (Aurora) where a player 'withdrew' due to cheating. The other players were advised that cheaters would be dealt with in a number of ways including having their name sent to the CFC. What would the CFC do with this information? I am just curious. And does a tournament or tournament director have a right to bar a player or players if they have cheated in the past or have been suspected of cheating in the past?

A TD can ban people from his or her tournament as he or she is presumably renting the hall. I am sure there are laws that apply in this regard. The CFC has in the past banned people from playing for a period of time where there were instances of cheating. I am not aware of what was done where someone was suspected of cheating. In the case of very young children and inexperienced parents a warning should suffice. I recall an instance in Windsor where a parent got excited and blurted a move out. The kid ignored dad's advice which probably would have lost instantly if the opponent played the best move in response. Dad was ushered away from the game and admonished.

In Detroit scholastic tournaments the TD's often discuss the rules before the round.

Under proposed FIDE rules which seem already being enforced just having a phone on your person is grounds for forfeit. You are allowed to have a turned off phone in your bag though I believe you need to inform the TD.

[Mathieu Cloutier]

Re: Cheating and CFC involvement

Under proposed FIDE rules which seem already being enforced just having a phone on your person is grounds for forfeit. You are allowed to have a turned off phone in your bag though I believe you need to inform the TD.

That new rule is completely useless. First, if you don't search people, you can't know for sure they have a phone or not. So we'll have to switch to full body search for everyone if we are ever to actually implement that rule. And anyways, it's becoming easier and easier to conceal small electronics.

My concern is that we're gonna go full TSA on that one and start implementing measures that are annoying for everyone while the cheaters still get to do their thing almost unhindered.

And anyways, there's some easy and non-intrusive ways to spot the cheaters.

-Established player who starts performing at a level way above his rating.
-The games themselves. I mean, we all know a computer game when we see one.
-Strange behaviour. Like a guy who's able to perform well, but only under specific circumstances - i.e. when a crowd or visitors are present, when he's got his jacket on. Can play 2300 chess at slow time control, but only 1600 in blitz etc.

Only when you suspect somebody should you switch to more intrusive investigation. Play over a game and analyze with him to determine if he understands what he's doing OTB. If you need ironclad proof, just be a little more on your guard next time he plays a tournament.

A full body search is certainly justifiable in some cases, but it should be your last resort.

[Roger Patterson]

Re: Cheating and CFC involvement

There were two incidents of dishonest behavior during the Aurora Fall Open.

#1
A very young kid trying something that didn't work. The father and the TD found a suitable punishment by withdrawing him from the tournament and disciplining him at home.
#2
In the second incident a strict verbal warning was given,and before the next round the TD reminded everybody to play fair. The TD will notify the CFC of the matter. (That's why I will not provide any further details at this moment.)

Cheating encompasses such a wide range of possible malfeasance. The thread seems to have assumed that these instances involved computers but that might not have been the case. Before the thread goes completely off track, perhaps, (although understandably you do not wish to provide details), state if computer use was the problem (or suspected).

[Roger Patterson]

Re: Cheating and CFC involvement

My concern is that we're gonna go full TSA on that one and start implementing measures that are annoying for everyone

yep. And that's the day I stop playing.

-Established player who starts performing at a level way above his rating.

happens all the time quite legitimately.

-The games themselves. I mean, we all know a computer game when we see one.

Then you are smarter than me. Ken Regan has put a lot of work into to trying to identify through careful analysis such cases. Clearly takes more effort than just playing over a game and saying "obviously a computer". Although his work is interesting and hopeful, I would say there are plenty of issues to work out and is only a partial solution to the problem of detecting computer usage.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Cheating and CFC involvement

Before the thread goes completely off track, perhaps, (although understandably you do not which to provide details), state if computer use was the problem (or suspected).

No computers/phones were involved in both cases.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Cheating and CFC involvement

Cheating is a catch all. Like you say, we don't know what's involved.

When I was directing CC events, particularly the ICCF events, the complaints used to get complicated and I'd ask for the rule under which the claim was being made.

One which stands out is one player who told his opponent he would allow him to take back a move in return for a laundry list of items like books. The player who blundered complained and sent me the letter his opponent wrote asking for the goodies.

I told the offender the length of the suspension I would give him from ICCF play if it happened again.

[Mathieu Cloutier]

Re: Cheating and CFC involvement

yep. And that's the day I stop playing.

And you're probably not the only one. But then again, people will stop playing if cheaters are proliferating. That's why I would go easy on the innefective anti-cheating annoyances, but go very harshly on suspensions when a cheater is actually caught.

happens all the time quite legitimately.

Sorry if it wasn't clear enough. I agree it happens all the time. A player rated 1600 can climb up to 2000 very quickly. But the thing I'm talking about is more like what we saw with Borislav Ivanov. A 1800-1900 player that suddenly started beating GMs here and there. That's unlikely.

Then you are smarter than me. Ken Regan has put a lot of work into to trying to identify through careful analysis such cases. Clearly takes more effort than just playing over a game and saying "obviously a computer". Although his work is interesting and hopeful, I would say there are plenty of issues to work out and is only a partial solution to the problem of detecting computer usage.

Again, I agree with you on the whole. It's extremely hard to prove without reasonable doubt that a game was indeed played by a computer. But it's relatively easy to spot a guy trying to pass computers moves as his own. I'm not talking about ironclad proof, such as Regan is trying to achieve, but more about spoting the kind of play that warrants some suspicion.

Again, the case of Borislav Ivanov was pretty telling. An older case was Clemens Allwermann at Wijk ann Zee open in 1999. The guy was just playing extremely complicated lines when he had simple wins at his disposal. See, for example:

http://en.chessbase.com/post/a-histo...ting-in-che-3-