Toronto Dragons

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Toronto Dragons

    Originally posted by John Upper View Post
    Can you send me some contact info for chess.com, I'd like to hear their version of it.

    In particular, which screw up do they admit to:
    1. a defective anti-cheating system that produced a false positive
    2. a defective appeals policy that protects the highest-profile players or teams
    3. something else
    John,

    FYI
    This is the game in question
    https://www.chess.com/live/game/1976...sername=bhonda
    Take a look at the clocks. With 13:37 on his clock, black spent 20 seconds for 18...Nf3+
    For the appeal I'm assuming that the following game was used to prove that their player is "innocent" and that it was "home preparation".
    http://www.viewchess.com/cbreader/20...921447673.html

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Toronto Dragons

      Originally posted by Rene Preotu View Post
      John,

      FYI
      This is the game in question
      https://www.chess.com/live/game/1976...sername=bhonda
      Take a look at the clocks. With 13:37 on his clock, black spent 20 seconds for 18...Nf3+
      For the appeal I'm assuming that the following game was used to prove that their player is "innocent" and that it was "home preparation".
      http://www.viewchess.com/cbreader/20...921447673.html
      Thanks for the reply Rene.

      I personally don't find 20 sec on ...Nf3+ to be all that suspicious. I remember watching the game live and thinking it was the obvious tactic -- with ...Bh3 and ...Nf4 as follow-ups -- I would have had a hard time waiting more than 20 sec to play it... but I probably have some self-control problems, and ought to spend more time on promising-looking moves. :)

      Was that the only game that was flagged as suspicious? If so, then it's a hard loss for Toronto -- doubly so when factoring in Bator's loss in a dead drawn B ending due to an internet disconnection -- but not one where they should feel cheated.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Toronto Dragons

        Originally posted by John Upper View Post
        Thanks for the reply Rene.

        I personally don't find 20 sec on ...Nf3+ to be all that suspicious. I remember watching the game live and thinking it was the obvious tactic -- with ...Bh3 and ...Nf4 as follow-ups -- I would have had a hard time waiting more than 20 sec to play it... but I probably have some self-control problems, and ought to spend more time on promising-looking moves. :)

        Was that the only game that was flagged as suspicious? If so, then it's a hard loss for Toronto -- doubly so when factoring in Bator's loss in a dead drawn B ending due to an internet disconnection -- but not one where they should feel cheated.
        Kumar was a cheating suspect way before PRO chess league, Glenn may want to post his investigation..so yes, Team Toronto was cheated.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Toronto Dragons

          Originally posted by John Upper View Post
          Was that the only game that was flagged as suspicious?
          I don't know. This was only my guessing. Nothing official from chess.com

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Toronto Dragons

            One of the most notable things about 12 year old Nikhil Kumar is that his FIDE rating rose from 2076 in October to 2479 in February (scoring a 2700 performance rating at Philadelphia early on). A prominent U.S. GM and IM have accused him of cheating in their games with him. It appears when the live coverage of his games went down in Las Vegas, he suddenly started losing. Also, apparently, the organizers of the recent Baltimore Open were concerned enough to install video cameras to watch for foul play, and he performed less well there.
            Last edited by Glenn Giffen; Tuesday, 7th March, 2017, 10:54 AM.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Toronto Dragons

              Some of his recent games:

              [Event "St Louis Winter GM"]
              [Site "St.Louis"]
              [Date "2017.03.04"]
              [Round "?"]
              [White "Checa, Nicolas D"]
              [Black "Kumar, Nikhil"]
              [Result "0-1"]
              [ECO "D37"]
              [PlyCount "68"]
              [EventDate "2017.02.19"]
              [EventCountry "USA"]

              1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Be7 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Bf4 O-O 6. Rc1 c5 7. dxc5 Qa5 8. e3
              Rd8 9. Bd6 dxc4 10. Nd2 Bxd6 11. cxd6 Rxd6 12. Qf3 Rxd2 13. Kxd2 Nc6 14. Bxc4
              Bd7 15. Rhd1 Rc8 16. Bb3 Ne5 17. Qe2 Rc5 18. Kc2 Bc6 19. f3 b5 20. a3 b4 21.
              axb4 Qxb4 22. Rd8+ Be8 23. Rd4 Qb6 24. Rcd1 h6 25. Rd6 Nc6 26. e4 Qb4 27. Qa6
              Na5 28. Ba2 Ba4+ 29. Kb1 Rxc3 30. R1d4 Bc2+ 31. Ka1 Rc4 32. Qc8+ Kh7 33. Bxc4
              Qa4+ 34. Ba2 Nb3# 0-1

              [Event "26th North American Open"]
              [Site "Las Vegas USA"]
              [Date "2016.12.28"]
              [Round "6.4"]
              [White "Kumar, Nikhil"]
              [Black "Gurevich, Daniel"]
              [Result "1-0"]
              [ECO "E46"]
              [WhiteElo "2251"]
              [BlackElo "2455"]
              [PlyCount "117"]
              [EventDate "2016.12.26"]
              [EventType "swiss"]
              [EventRounds "9"]
              [EventCountry "USA"]

              1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e3 O-O 5. Nge2 d5 6. a3 Be7 7. cxd5 exd5 8.
              Nf4 c6 9. Bd3 a5 10. O-O Na6 11. f3 Nc7 12. Qc2 c5 13. dxc5 Bxc5 14. Kh1 Bd6
              15. Bd2 Be6 16. Nxe6 Nxe6 17. Rac1 Rc8 18. Qb1 h6 19. Nb5 Bc5 20. b4 axb4 21.
              axb4 Bb6 22. Rxc8 Qxc8 23. Nd6 Qd7 24. Nf5 Rc8 25. Qa1 d4 26. e4 h5 27. e5 Nd5
              28. f4 Ne3 29. Bxe3 dxe3 30. Nd6 Rf8 31. Bb5 Qe7 32. Bc4 Kh8 33. Qc3 f5 34.
              Bxe6 Qxe6 35. Qc4 Qxc4 36. Nxc4 Rd8 37. Nd6 Ra8 38. Re1 g6 39. g3 Kg7 40. Nc4
              Bd4 41. Nxe3 Bxe3 42. Rxe3 Ra1+ 43. Kg2 Rb1 44. e6 Kf8 45. Kh3 Rxb4 46. e7+ Ke8
              47. Re6 Rb2 48. Kh4 Rxh2+ 49. Kg5 Rc2 50. Kxg6 Rc7 51. Kf6 Rd7 52. Re5 b5 53.
              Rxb5 Rd6+ 54. Kg5 Rd3 55. Kh4 Rd1 56. Kxh5 Rg1 57. Kh4 Rh1+ 58. Kg5 Rh3 59. Rb3
              1-0

              [Event "PRO Chess League"]
              [Site "Chess.com"]
              [Date "2017.01.11"]
              [Round "1"]
              [White "Kumar, Nikhil"]
              [Black "Guseinov, Gadir"]
              [Result "1/2-1/2"]
              [ECO "E83"]
              [WhiteElo "2379"]
              [BlackElo "2643"]
              [PlyCount "95"]
              [EventDate "2017.01.11"]
              [EventType "schev (rapid)"]
              [EventRounds "7"]
              [WhiteTeam "Miami Champions"]
              [BlackTeam "Atlanta Kings"]

              1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f3 O-O 6. Be3 Nc6 7. Nge2 a6 8. Qd2
              Bd7 9. Rc1 b5 10. c5 dxc5 11. d5 Ne5 12. Bxc5 Nc4 13. Qc2 Bh6 14. Rd1 Ne3 15.
              Bxe3 Bxe3 16. Nd4 c5 17. dxc6 Qb6 18. Qd3 Bxd4 19. Qxd4 Qxd4 20. Rxd4 Bxc6 21.
              Be2 Rfd8 22. Rd2 e5 23. g4 Kf8 24. h4 Ke7 25. Rxd8 Rxd8 26. Kf2 Rd2 27. Nd1 h5
              28. g5 Nd7 29. Ke3 Rd4 30. Nc3 Nc5 31. Rd1 Ne6 32. a3 Rxd1 33. Bxd1 f6 34.
              gxf6+ Kxf6 35. Bb3 Nf4 36. Bd5 Bd7 37. Bb7 a5 38. Nd5+ Nxd5+ 39. Bxd5 g5 40.
              hxg5+ Kxg5 41. b4 axb4 42. axb4 h4 43. Bf7 h3 44. Kf2 Kf4 45. Bh5 Be6 46. Be8
              Bc4 47. Bd7 h2 48. Kg2 1/2-1/2

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Toronto Dragons

                Look at my game against him. He defended extremely well in knight ending. Pay attention to 56.Kf3! Any other move loses quickly.
                https://www.chess.com/live/game/1976346422

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Toronto Dragons

                  Originally posted by Bator Sambuev View Post
                  Look at my game against him. He defended extremely well in knight ending. Pay attention to 56.Kf3! Any other move loses quickly.
                  https://www.chess.com/live/game/1976346422
                  Wow. I'm wondering what excuse they've used for this game. This can't be "home preparation". Now it looks obvious that the team was robbed of at least 1 point out of 2.
                  The funny part is that the fair play representative from chess.com planned to connect with me and watch Razvan playing using Skype. Why he didn't watch this guy instead? Or maybe he did watch him for the last 2 games when he played like a "patzer". So many unanswered questions by chess.com
                  Last edited by Rene Preotu; Tuesday, 7th March, 2017, 04:57 PM. Reason: added quotation marks for patzer

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Toronto Dragons

                    Originally posted by Rene Preotu View Post
                    Wow. I'm wondering what excuse they've used for this game. This can't be "home preparation". Now it looks obvious that the team was robbed of at least 1 point out of 2.
                    The funny part is that the fair play representative from chess.com planned to connect with me and watch Razvan playing using Skype. Why he didn't watch this guy instead? Or maybe he did watch him for the last 2 games when he played like a patzer. So many unanswered questions by chess.com
                    He didn't play like a patzer. After 6-2 in first two rounds he just played himself.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Toronto Dragons

                      Originally posted by Bator Sambuev View Post
                      He didn't play like a patzer. After 6-2 in first two rounds he just played himself.
                      I forgot to add the quotation marks.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Toronto Dragons

                        Originally posted by Nikolay Noritsyn View Post
                        Kumar was a cheating suspect way before PRO chess league, Glenn may want to post his investigation..so yes, Team Toronto was cheated.
                        I'll keep repeating this until something is done about it: Borislav Ivanov's cheating method that was so successful and undiscovered could be in the wild. Meaning anyone in chess could be using it, judiciously so that it is very very hard to detect.

                        All high-level or big-money chess results are suspect. And that's at normal tournament events held at brick-and-mortar facilities. Remote events like this Pro Chess League: even more suspect.

                        What can be done?

                        Chess has to change. The process of evolution must be allowed to proceed.
                        Only the rushing is heard...
                        Onward flies the bird.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X