TalkChess.com

M ANSARI wrote:I always think it is best to err on the side of the accused. Unless there was some obvious technical proof that some electronic device, or signaling, or other means of cheating took place ... I think it is highly unfair to claim such a serious offense by simply looking at moves.

There is ample testimony. In any case, her other games are much the same, some with tactical play that is also hard to believe. Still, the constant attempts to play in beginner tournaments really has to be an all-time low.

Pocket Fritz 2 picks 16. ... Kg8 (depth=8, +0.54) and also 17. ... g5 (depth=8, +0.64) but never proposes 15. ... Kh8 (it’s not even among the best 6 moves).

There is a slight chance that it might propose 15. Kh8 if the moves prior to this position are actually played though (hash). I couldn’t find the game to check that.

Roman

I found the game score 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 5.c3 0-0 6.0-0 d6 7.Bg5 Qe7 8.Nbd2 h6 9.Bh4 Bd7 10.Re1 a6 11.Ba4 Ba7 12.Nf1 Rfe8 13.Ne3 Bxe3 14.Rxe3 Rad8 15.h3 Kh8 16.Re1 Kg8 17.Bc2 g5 18.Nxg5 hxg5 19.Bxg5 Kh8 20.Qf3 Kg7 21.Re3 Rg8 22.Qg3 Kf8 23.Rf3 Rg6 24.d4 Kg7 25.Rxf6 Rxf6 26.d5 Nd4 27.Bxf6+ Kxf6 28.Qh4+ 1-0

And after checking thru the game with various software I come to conclusion that there was no help.There were some horrible moves made by L Stork most notable been the 24.Kg7?? with all engines spotting that as losing and evals go from close to equal to a big jump of +5 in an instant.And many other moves made were not in the various engines top 4 choices.So benefit of doubt goes to her.Not that I am defending her actions in NZ, I just want to be fair.

Cubeman wrote:And after checking thru the game with various software I come to conclusion that there was no help.

Which just shows that it is less than obvious to catch a cheat. Of course in the case of Feller and Stock, the fact that people actually saw them cheat is why their games came under scrutiny in the first place.

Cubeman wrote:And after checking thru the game with various software I come to conclusion that there was no help.There were some horrible moves made by L Stork most notable been the 24.Kg7?? with all engines spotting that as losing and evals go from close to equal to a big jump of +5 in an instant.And many other moves made were not in the various engines top 4 choices.So benefit of doubt goes to her.Not that I am defending her actions in NZ, I just want to be fair.

I don't think I'm much of a chess player to judge the game. But to me this particular game also doesn't look like perfect engine play.

I have seen some of the so called Fischer games played on a chess server a few years ago though and in that case it was easy to see that they were played with the help of an engine.

For a weak player it's probably not easy to hide the engine use anyway as they have to rely completely on the moves proposed by the engine while stronger players might only need advice in certain situations. I assume it's therefore easier to catch weak players cheating with engine support than strong ones provided that someone checks the games in question.

Roman

Leto wrote:the fact she's playing in a sub-1700 tournament and thus didn't yet understand why that's a dubious move. G5 looks even less suspicious to me.

It was a strong tournament:

Festival Trieste 2007
> CLASSIFICA FINALE
> 1°-10° TORNEO 'A' - MASTER>
> 1 GM Tiviakov Sergei NED 7
> 2 GM Baklan Vladimir UKR 7
> 3 IM Caruana Fabiano ITA 6½
> 4 IM Hendriks Willy NED 6
> 5 IM Borisek Jure SLO 6
> 6 GM Bagaturov Giorgi GEO 6
> 7 WIM Stock Lara CRO 5½
> 8 GM Pavasovic Dusko SLO 5½
> 9 GM Tratar Marko SLO 5½
> 10 GM Komarov Dimitri UKR 5½
>
> http://www.sst1904.com/pagine/index.html