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.
Cheating is all about risk vs reward. If the reward (ie prize fund) is kept low, then the risk becomes not worth it. When the reward becomes higher (ie an increased prize fund) then the risk has to be increased by having cameras and screen sharing, etc.
There is another thing to think about in the issue of cheating: the age and talent of the person who is supposed to be cheating.
A teenage junior who is improving rabidly might just by chance get good enough to start making GM-level moves in a particular game and trigger anti-cheating software to identify him or her as a cheater in that game. If the junior objects and says s/he was just playing good moves, are you going to deny that it is possible?
Whereas if Bob Armstrong suddenly starts playing GM-level moves throughout a whole game …. lol sorry Bob, I saw your post about your ratings so just had to use you as an example! Hope you don't mind. :)
The one thing you don't want to do with anti-cheating is overapply it, because it is like saying to everyone in a tournament: Okay, here is where we EXPECT you to finish in the standings, and if you don't do that and have a surprising good tournament, we are going to take you to a back room and find out the truth....
What this means to me is that cheating is not really a disease, it is a symptom. The real disease is that chess has come to the point where cheating is even possible and as Fred says can be rewarding in some circumstances. This means chess has a disease, but the disease is not the cheating itself.
Remember the "good old days" when games were adjourned and players would be up all night analyzing? That has gone away and it is a clue about the disease. The disease is that chess is precisely calculable now by any of thousands of engines. This means chess as a human contest is no longer the same. To keep it going, you have to have now all these anti-cheating measures so that no one is playing above their real abilities. It makes it all.... meaningless.
Nakamura and Carlsen just played a best of 7 series of rapid / blitz matches and it went down to the 7th match and Armageddon game decided it. What does it all mean? Nothing really.
Cheating is all about risk vs reward. If the reward (ie prize fund) is kept low, then the risk becomes not worth it. When the reward becomes higher (ie an increased prize fund) then the risk has to be increased by having cameras and screen sharing, etc.
A player could have a board beside the computer and play through variations. Or an opened opening or endgame book. Or somebody with a computer just outside the room who could signal when there is a sudden exclaim move. But somebody who cheats doesn't really want to play chess.
Have to have an Arbiter in every room.
As long as the Arbiter can be trusted etc. What could go wrong? :)
A player could have a board beside the computer and play through variations. Or an opened opening or endgame book. Or somebody with a computer just outside the room who could signal when there is a sudden exclaim move. But somebody who cheats doesn't really want to play chess.
How is it possible to detect a cheater who uses the computer program just once a game at most, and only in key positions where it finds a tactical shot?
When I was a young kid I often wondered how the police would investigate and find someone who committed exactly *one* robbery (say) of a store where they carefully disguised themselves and picked a random store in a neighbourhood where they had no connection... It seemed to me that the majority of "solved" crimes were aided by the accumulation of many bits of information and data which would be missing from this 'restrained criminal'. The list of suspects would be very large and there would be basically no connection between the perp and the crime.
I don't see any clear way to reliably catch cheaters - hackers and people who are motivated enough will find gaps in almost any system - for reference, see the current internet.
Some of Ken Reagan's work to provide a high probability that someone is cheating (by making "too many" moves that are just unlikely to be found by humans*) is simply an attempt to mitigate the problem.
(* - a highly simplified description)
Cheaters will find a way and that will be discovered and blocked and everyone moves on. At this point cheating detection must be very heuristic.
About seven years ago I was recruited by schemingmind.com to help work on a cheat detection system. We didn't even get past the first stage and I'm convinced sites that ban regularly (like chess.com) are only catching the blatant cheaters.
The first stage of the trial was to run a fairly basic engine detection algorithm (checking for top 3 matches on 3 different engines and generating an 'accuracy ratio') on a set of 100 games. Half the games were correspondence matches from before engines, and the other half were modern correspondence games where engine use was allowed.
How is it possible to detect a cheater who uses the computer program just once a game at most, and only in key positions where it finds a tactical shot?
How is it possible to detect a cheater who uses the computer program just once a game at most, and only in key positions where it finds a tactical shot?
I believe there is a consensus that computer-assisted cheating is a real plague of contemporary chess.
We have already taken strong steps to enhance our efficiency in fighting it, including strengthening analytical tools, using detectors and scanners in all official FIDE events, training arbiters, finding a right legal basis, and having a dedicated team working on these matters.
The online chess boom brought new challenges, and although the number of suspicious cases is fairly low, FIDE must act vigorously, sending a clear message to potential violators in order to create a secure environment in our competitions.
We work together with the leading online chess platforms. We have adjusted the algorithms used for online play. Having a lot of data, we sharpened our statistical methods – and in these regards, I’d like to thank Professor Ken Reagan, who keeps improving his algorithm – and those who think his method does not work against the so-called smart cheaters, they will be surprised.
We must act, and I want to emphasize that FIDE will be ready for the ensuing legal challenges.
However, I feel that we need a broad consensus on the measures applied. Below are the main questions we would like to have your opinion on:
1. Our methods of detection, although very advanced and ever-improving, can't provide a 100% confirmation. In many cases, the probability estimated is higher than the one for DNA tests. Do you believe a statistical algorithm (or a combination of those) giving close to 100% probability of cheating could stand as sufficient grounds for banning a player? If yes - what odds would you find sufficient?
2. Shall FIDE apply sanctions for alleged online violations to over-the-board-play (and vice versa)?
3. Shall we apply sanctions for alleged violations at platforms’ own events, and other unofficial online events, to official FIDE online events (and vice versa)?
4. Shall we publish the names of alleged violators after the very first conviction?
5. Shall the violators be punished retroactively, with their prize money, rating and titles been revoked for some period preceding the verdict? And, if yes, how far back should these actions go?
6. What would you consider a reasonable banning period for first-time violators, and for repeat offenders? How strict should be the measures in youth competitions?
There are many questions and some of them are related to the moral and legal aspects of the subject. Having a fair and transparent system will require a trusted framework. The worst thing to do would be to ban an innocent player.
Likewise, the reputation of chess and our global chess family could suffer tremendous damage if a tsunami of scandals and court procedures starts to overshadow the exciting environment of international chess competitions.
We must be strict, but responsible. Firm, but accountable. And before approving a general policy, we would like to hear your opinions. You may answer the questions raised in this communication or simply submit your proposals to the following email: anticheating@fide.com
It is going to be a long battle, but I am sure we will succeed.
Leave a comment: