If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Of all the possible aspects I could have led off with, the one I chose to mandate at top level is that there shall be a distinction between a screening test and a full test.
Very good point.
When you play a lot of chess, it's almost inevitable that one of your games will end up matching what Houdini would have done. The problem is when you do it 3-4-5 times in a row... against much stronger opposition... while wearing very large shoes.
This year international media such as the BBC and the Telegraph reported the Imperia Chess Festival in Italy. Sadly, the reason was a case of alleged cheating.
The player suspected of foul play is Arcangelo Ricciardi from Italy who is 37 years old and has a rating of 1829. After seven rounds he was leading the tournament with 6.0/7 and had aroused the suspicion of International Arbiter Jean Coqueraut.
"In chess, performances like this are impossible", the arbiter told the Italian newspaper La Stampa.
Coqueraut had watched Ricciardi closely and noticed that the Italian behaved in a suspicious way. As the arbiter observed, Ricciardi did not once get up during the game and constantly had his hand under his armpit. He was also "batting his eyelids in the most unnatural way". Finally, the arbiter decided to check Ricciardi with a metal detector and it turned out that the player had a camera hidden in a pendant around his neck. The camera was connected to a small box under his armpit.
Ricciardi claimed that the pendant was a "lucky charm" but the organisers decided to ban him from the tournament and declared all his games as lost by default because of the forbidden electronic equipment he had on him.
They assumed that Ricciardi's equipment was used to transmit moves to someone with a chess computer who used Morse code to transmit the computer moves back to the player. Arbiter Coqueraut suspected that Ricciardi "was deciphering signals in Morse code" when he blinked.
This year international media such as the BBC and the Telegraph reported the Imperia Chess Festival in Italy. Sadly, the reason was a case of alleged cheating.
The player suspected of foul play is Arcangelo Ricciardi from Italy who is 37 years old and has a rating of 1829. After seven rounds he was leading the tournament with 6.0/7 and had aroused the suspicion of International Arbiter Jean Coqueraut.
"In chess, performances like this are impossible", the arbiter told the Italian newspaper La Stampa.
Coqueraut had watched Ricciardi closely and noticed that the Italian behaved in a suspicious way. As the arbiter observed, Ricciardi did not once get up during the game and constantly had his hand under his armpit. He was also "batting his eyelids in the most unnatural way". Finally, the arbiter decided to check Ricciardi with a metal detector and it turned out that the player had a camera hidden in a pendant around his neck. The camera was connected to a small box under his armpit.
Ricciardi claimed that the pendant was a "lucky charm" but the organisers decided to ban him from the tournament and declared all his games as lost by default because of the forbidden electronic equipment he had on him.
They assumed that Ricciardi's equipment was used to transmit moves to someone with a chess computer who used Morse code to transmit the computer moves back to the player. Arbiter Coqueraut suspected that Ricciardi "was deciphering signals in Morse code" when he blinked.
I took a quick look at the round four game. The opening - by Black! - looked pretty weird and I didn't understand why Black couldn't trade Qs at move 50. Is trading somehow bad? If I had been Black in that game (not withstanding the opponent's strange behaviour) I would not have guessed he was using a computer.
Last edited by Tom O'Donnell; Wednesday, 16th September, 2015, 03:25 PM.
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
There is a fascinating video, which presents the circumstantial evidence for Bulgarian player Radi Danov cheating at chess.
I actually listened to the whole thing, all 37 minutes, which describes how the narrator believes that an older analytical engine was used to win and draw tournament games so that Danov’s rating would steadily rise.
and is entitled New Case of Cheating in Chess? By Valeri Lilov.
It is convincing in its conclusions but nothing is said as to how the moves are inputted to the engine and how they are received by the player to be acted upon.
I am in complete agreement with Roger de Coverly who wrote this:
It remains my belief that you need to detect the method of inputting the moves to the engine and receiving suggested replies back, before throwing accusations around. In many cases, the circumstantial evidence is obvious enough, that a player had a device in their possession or hidden somewhere to which they had access and periodically appeared to retire to consult it. They may only have been reading their emails or checking the football scores, but such behaviour during a game is now outlawed.
The article raises the question as to whether computer matching should also test use engines from twenty or twenty five years ago. Something I've wondered is whether a test using a modern engine can detect whether a game played by an old engine was computer or human.
Seizing on individual moves as engine inspired may be correct, but doesn't prove cheating as pre game preparation can reach similar positions even if the position itself hasn't appeared in published analysis or an actual game.
April 28, 2016
It is convincing in its conclusions ....
really?
Lets see:
he asks if it is reasonable that somebody plays well in one game and then later in the tournament plays badly against someone. - yeah, it's happened to me more times than I can count.
he asks if it is reasonable that somebody misunderstands a theme like Fischer's Nh5 in a Benoni and plays the idea in a position in which it doesn't work. - yeah, its happened to me more times than I can count.
he asks if it is reasonable that somebody can play quickly and well. yeah - I understand Anand in his youth used to do that. Fortunately it was before computers were strong enough that he could be accused of cheating.
he suggests that suddenly playing at a higher level is suspicious and then suggests that gradually improving to a higher level is also suspicious. Pretty much covers all the bases.
And then, there is the facile statement that he is not suggesting that this particular player is cheating. BS. If you produce a video that is entirely about cheating in a particular way and then spend considerable time discussing a particular player's games as an example, yes you are accusing someone of being a cheat.
Does he have any evidence to back him up? Nothing - no suspicious behaviour, no computer matching of moves, bupkis, nada, zilch.
It was irresponsible of ChessBase to publish such an accusation without a scintilla of evidence.
It was irresponsible of ChessBase to publish such an accusation without a scintilla of evidence.
I wouldn't say there was no evidence, but it was extremely scanty, imo. No way ChessBase should have published this. There are a bunch of alternate explanations but here's one possibility: maybe Mr. Danov is/was taking prescription medication that made his play erratic.
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
I wouldn't say there was no evidence, but it was extremely scanty, imo. No way ChessBase should have published this. There are a bunch of alternate explanations but here's one possibility: maybe Mr. Danov is/was taking prescription medication that made his play erratic.
I think the evidence is overwelming after you read this: "In the fourth round of the Dupnitsa Memorial Lyuben Konstantino tournament Radi Danov beat Ivaylo Enchev. The arbiters asked to check Danov's shoes, but the player refused, whereupon the result of the game was changed in favor of Enchev, and Danov was expelled from the tournament – which he accepted, rather than allow the checking of his shoes!"
I think the evidence is overwelming after you read this: "In the fourth round of the Dupnitsa Memorial Lyuben Konstantino tournament Radi Danov beat Ivaylo Enchev. The arbiters asked to check Danov's shoes, but the player refused, whereupon the result of the game was changed in favor of Enchev, and Danov was expelled from the tournament – which he accepted, rather than allow the checking of his shoes!"
I agree that the thing with the shoes is suspicious, but that isn't the evidence that Lilov presents. Instead, he presents a bunch of speculation, lots of talk about patterns. Ones he has to constantly adjust to fit his narrative. He really sounds like a guy who already had made up his mind before doing his investigation.
"Peter Jameson
This article alleging that Ivanov is a cheat provides no real evidence. How does he cheat even in rapid games watched by a horde of observers? And what are we to make of the two other amazing players in the table displayed after nine rounds? Lyubomir Danov ranked 16th initially sits in seventh place above many titled players! Even more dramatic is Radi Danov who sits in sixth place though initially seeded 28th! And above many titled players. His performance is remarkable too, possibly puts Ivanov in the shade! And both of these players with very lowly ratings. So is your correspondent Alex Karaivanov now demanding an investigation of these players too? If not why not? Or has Alex Karaivanov shot himself in both feet?"
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
I think the evidence is overwelming after you read this: "In the fourth round of the Dupnitsa Memorial Lyuben Konstantino tournament Radi Danov beat Ivaylo Enchev. The arbiters asked to check Danov's shoes, but the player refused, whereupon the result of the game was changed in favor of Enchev, and Danov was expelled from the tournament – which he accepted, rather than allow the checking of his shoes!"
I would say that is not probative. That kind of refusal is not considered probative in a court of law for refusing to let a policeman to search you, your car, or your house. Why would it be probative in a chess court? If I were to be in that situation, I too would refuse to take off my shoes unless I perhaps had the opportunity to throw them at the head of the accuser.
The problem is, if I take off my shoes the accuser is not then going to say " Oh I guess I was wrong - you are innocent and I withdraw my accusations completely". He's going to say " well he must have something hidden under his shirt or in his pants" and if I do a full Monty, "he must have an accomplice".
Under the circumstances there is no upside to agreeing to take off one's shoes.
Last edited by Roger Patterson; Thursday, 28th April, 2016, 11:43 PM.
I would say that is not probative. That kind of refusal is not considered probative in a court of law for refusing to let a policeman to search you, your car, or your house. Why would it be probative in a chess court? If I were to be in that situation, I too would refuse to take off my shoes unless I perhaps had the opportunity to throw them at the head of the accuser.
The problem is, if I take off my shoes the accuser is not then going to say " Oh I guess I was wrong - you are innocent and I withdraw my accusations completely". He's going to say " well he must have something hidden under his shirt or in his pants" and if I do a full Monty, "he must have an accomplice".
Under the circumstances there is no upside to agreeing to take off one's shoes.
The point is not about refusing any kind of body search, even something as trivial as removing your shoes. The fact is, the guy agreed to be expelled from the tournament. Without even trying to argue in any way about the whole process.
If you're not guilty of anything, you contest both the shoe inspection AND the tournament disqualification. Nodding at the accuser and saying 'I'm sorry' just won't cut it. You will look guilty no matter what.
And what are we to make of the two other amazing players in the table displayed after nine rounds? Lyubomir Danov ranked 16th initially sits in seventh place above many titled players! Even more dramatic is Radi Danov who sits in sixth place though initially seeded 28th! And above many titled players. His performance is remarkable too, possibly puts Ivanov in the shade! And both of these players with very lowly ratings.
This suggests that Borislav Ivanov, Luybomir Danov and Radi Danov were cheating at the same time... they were presumably in the same team of cheaters, with several accomplices... full scale organized cheating... This is really scary, and should be addressed seriously by the authorities.
What if a player in a tournament says another player is cheating and the accusation turns out to be unfounded?
Readers might remember that about this time of year in 2015 the European Women’s Championship was taking place in Chavki, Georgia.
After seven rounds, the Romanian player Mihaela Sandu was standing second with 6.0 points. See posts nos. 31 and 32 in this thread.
She had started with 5/5. When the transmission of a game was delayed, she lost and when it wasn’t, she won. Two letters were signed by the participants implying that she was cheating. When the tournament finished, she was not in the top finishers, she was 26th.
_______
The FIDE Ethics Commission has been meeting in Madrid and took up this case along with others.
During play, a player is forbidden to have a mobile phone and/or other electronic means of communication in the playing venue. If it is evident that a player brought such a device into the playing venue, he shall lose the game. The opponent shall win.
The arbiter may require the player to allow his clothes, bags or other items to be inspected, in private. The arbiter or a person authorised by the arbiter shall inspect the player and shall be of the same gender as the player (11.3 FIDE Law of Chess).
So if you suspect, during the play, that your opponent is cheating you may announce this to the arbiter. Arbiter should observe your opponent and may decide to control him. But in case of a false accusation you may be penalized by the arbiter according to the Article 12.2 and 12.9 of the Laws of Chess (from warning to expulsion from the competition).
Albert Silver who wrote this article said that at the time:
Needless to say, this led to a flurry of analysis by players, grandmasters, and experts. The author of these lines also checked and saw nothing out of the ordinary other than a large number of fatal mistakes by her opponents. In other words, the accusers would find the culprit for their losses by looking in the mirror.
________
The letter from the FEC to Ms Sandu on April 24, 2017:
FIDE ETHICS COMMISSION
24 April 2017
To: The Complainant, Ms. Mihaela Sandu
And to: The Respondents
The provisional finding of the Ethics Commission is as follows:
Respondents 1-15 are all guilty of a breach of art. 2.2.11 of the FIDE Code of Ethics for making reckless and unjustified accusations of cheating against WGM Michaela Sandu, thereby injuring and discrediting her reputation as a honest player.
The Ethics Commission intends to impose the following sanctions:
Respondent no. 1:
Ms Natalia Zhukova
A three (3) month ban from playing chess in any tournament. The sanction is wholly suspended for a period of one (1) year, on the condition that she is not found guilty of making reckless or unjustified accusations of cheating against any other chess player during the period of suspension.
Respondents no. 2-10:
Ms Alisa Galliamova
Ms Lanita Stetsko
Ms Anastasia Bodnaruk
Ms Dina Belenkaya
Ms Jovana Rapport (nee Vojinova)
Ms Svetlana Matveeva
Ms Marina Guseva
Ms Anna Tskhadadze
Ms Tatiana Ivanova
A reprimand (severe expression of disapproval and warning of consequences if conduct is repeated)
Respondents no. 11-15:
Ms Natassia Ziaziulkina
Ms Anastasia Savina
Ms Evgenija Ovod
Ms Melia Salome
Ms Ekaterina Kovalevskaya
A warming (caution to avoid a repeat of the same conduct).
The making of reckless and unjustified accusations of cheating is a serious offence which will normally attract severe punishment. In the present case the proposed sanctions were mitigated, amongst other things, by the inappropriate handling of the situation by the officials as well as the long time delay (relating to the formal establishment of the ACC) since the happening of the incident.
The differentiation between the sanctions proposed for the three groups of players is justified by the fact that Respondent no. 1 played a leading role in obtaining the signatures of the other players. Respondents no. 2-10 did not show remorse for their actions by withdrawing their signatures or giving an apology, whereas Respondents no. 11-15 did show the necessary remorse by withdrawing their signatures or apologizing for their conduct.
Note: The findings are subject to confirmation on May 10, subject to challenge prior, upon which the sanctions will be made official.
Everybody should know the Rules, not just the IA, even though the latter can register for a lecture on the subject of Anti-Cheating as I did.
Section 3 - Complaints
Handling complaints is a sensitive phase of the anti-cheating effort . The ACC acknowledges that a proliferation of complaints from players is not desirable . In order that complaints are grounded on direct evidence rather than hearsay, the ACC undertakes to formulate requirements that must be met by anyone submitting an allegation of breach of AC regulations . This applies both for the in-tournament and the post-tournament complaint procedures itemized here described below, while the ACC also proposes that a sanction system be put in place to deter serial submission of unfounded accusations . For these reasons, during a tournament the arbiter shall have a duty to require submission of a written record of each and every allegation of breach of AC regulations by a FIDE-rated player. Therefore, a person cannot “informally” tell an arbiter that they suspect that another player is in breach of AC regulations . This also applies to any other person having a FIDE Identity Number. Instead, a formal complaint must be filed . All written complaints and any written communications related to such complaint(s) shall be duly recorded by the arbiter and subsequently presented to the ACC .
Part A: In-Tournament Complaints
Potential breaches may be observed during play directly by a tournament arbiter. They can also be reported to the arbiter by a player, a spectator or, indeed, the ACC (e .g ., based on statistical analysis or on-site inspection) .If the report is based on possible breaches of Article 11 .2 or 11 .3a, then the arbiter shall investigate the breach in the usual manner, with reference to Article 12 .9 for possible penalties .If the complaint is specifically about possible breach of AC regulations, then the Chief Arbiter shall, in the first place, identify the complainant and invite him/her to fill out a Complaint Form (Appendix A) . The Chief Arbiter shall inform the complainant about the penalty for filing a false complaint . The complainant shall provide to the arbiter the reasons why the complaint is being made, and shall sign the form on completion . However, if the complainant is tense, the arbiter shall record the name of the complainant and ask for his/her signature, and only at a later time require him/her to fill in the form, but no later than the end of the round . If the complainant fails to fill out the Complaint Form by the aforementioned deadline, then the complainant can receive a warning by the Chief Arbiter, whereupon his name will be added to a special “Warning database” maintained by the ACC.
Tweet
Comment