Cheating suspicion at the Zadar Open in Croatia

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Dann Corbit, hgm

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Post Reply
User avatar
geots
Posts: 4790
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:42 pm

Re: Cheating suspicion at the Zadar Open in Croatia.

Post by geots » Wed Jan 16, 2013 12:27 pm

Lavir wrote:
geots wrote: But are you saying that in itself, with no concrete evidence, ie catching him with the goods on him- is enough to convict or find him guilty. You never really said, and I just wondered.
No, naturally, that's not enough at all. If they did search him and didn't find nothing and that was the only way they had at their disposal then one is obviously innocent until proven guilty.

However what I'm saying is that searching alone is an abysmal method of cheating detection in itself, and so abiding to it as a way to prove someone guilty or innocent is completely at fault from beginning; i.e. you would never know for sure one way or another, and you could actually commit a terrible error on both fronts.

There are much better options and I find it strange that the only thing the organizers could come up with was searching the guy as proof of something.


Ok, but if they wanted to hire you to make sure nothing like this happened again, (they wouldn't have the money to do it, but bear with me a moment) the first thing you would have to do is, if he was cheating, figure out how he did it. Because if you didn't know that, you couldn't stop it in the future. And as far as I know, no one has a clue how it was done- if in fact it was.


george

Lavir
Posts: 263
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 10:45 am

Re: Cheating suspicion at the Zadar Open in Croatia.

Post by Lavir » Wed Jan 16, 2013 2:49 pm

geots wrote:
Ok, but if they wanted to hire you to make sure nothing like this happened again, (they wouldn't have the money to do it, but bear with me a moment) the first thing you would have to do is, if he was cheating, figure out how he did it. Because if you didn't know that, you couldn't stop it in the future. And as far as I know, no one has a clue how it was done- if in fact it was.


george
There are too many possible ways in which one can organize the cheating and one can always invent new things. Establishing how it is done can be just impossible if you approach the thing directly. The best thing you can do is trying to prevent it (one possible way could be with an equipment that prevents any electronic apparel to function in the chess table, for example) and to understand with little doubt if cheating happened or not with indirect methods; this will have also, indirectly, the benefit of making you understand how the cheating was done.

Let's take what happened in this case as an example: the organizers approached the problem directly, with a search. They did found nothing. However cheating was much probably done. Result: the guy did what he wanted and the organizers didn't either find how he did it. If instead they tried to prevent cheating in some way (there are many possible solutions) or instead of searching the guy they would have tried to understand if he was cheating in an indirect way (as for example making him explain the moves or analyzing the previous game vs. the current ones as others have done etc.) they would have immediately discovered if something was odd and this would have even make them understand how the guy did it (the guy, with the back to the wall could even tell it himself).

aturri
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 10:35 pm

Re: Cheating suspicion at the Zadar Open in Croatia.

Post by aturri » Wed Jan 16, 2013 3:22 pm

Lavir wrote:
geots wrote:
Ok, but if they wanted to hire you to make sure nothing like this happened again, (they wouldn't have the money to do it, but bear with me a moment) the first thing you would have to do is, if he was cheating, figure out how he did it. Because if you didn't know that, you couldn't stop it in the future. And as far as I know, no one has a clue how it was done- if in fact it was.


george
There are too many possible ways in which one can organize the cheating and one can always invent new things. Establishing how it is done can be just impossible if you approach the thing directly. The best thing you can do is trying to prevent it (one possible way could be with an equipment that prevents any electronic apparel to function in the chess table, for example) and to understand with little doubt if cheating happened or not with indirect methods; this will have also, indirectly, the benefit of making you understand how the cheating was done.

Let's take what happened in this case as an example: the organizers approached the problem directly, with a search. They did found nothing. However cheating was much probably done. Result: the guy did what he wanted and the organizers didn't either find how he did it. If instead they tried to prevent cheating in some way (there are many possible solutions) or instead of searching the guy they would have tried to understand if he was cheating in an indirect way (as for example making him explain the moves or analyzing the previous game vs. the current ones as others have done etc.) they would have immediately discovered if something was odd and this would have even make them understand how the guy did it (the guy, with the back to the wall could even tell it himself).
As there are many ways to cheat it is quite difficult to go catch it. If the players make the complaint and you actuate indirectly, perhaps the opponents feel even worse, as it seems you are doing nothing.

Anyway, we should remember the way it was used in the french scandal in the Oympiad: Internet -> Analyze at home -> send SMS (now wassup) to a watcher -> transmite the move to the player via prestablished signals (even just depending where you locate e.g.)

So delaying the relay of the moves on Internet still could be circunvented by a live watcher: it is unsound to delay also the moves to the live audience.

It is very difficult the labour of the arbiters and organizers..

jefk
Posts: 431
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:07 pm
Location: the Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Cheating suspicion at the Zadar Open in Croatia.

Post by jefk » Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:19 pm

well yes, it will become a new problem for the arbiters, and tournament directors. that there was cheating is highly likely when you see the video by Lilov on the Chessbase site. Bulgarian spy toys, like a micro-earphone which only a doctor can remove later. they could do scans, but also delaying the transmission of the game to internet with half an hour or so could be a solution.

other more radical solution would be to allow help by computers, a first step would be to allow participationg of computers in normal chess tournaments. human grandmasters then quickly will become second class players, like computers and their operators and bookmakers comparable to F1 racing and the grandmasters comparable with cyclist like eg. Armstrong..:)
but then i would recommend to abolish the Fide 50 move draw rule for computers to make the games, in particular endgame struggles more interesting. or some other changes, eg. remove the pawn on f3 to get rid of the white opening advantage, and openings books as well;
as it is now the computers are severely discriminated.
just some ideas
jef

[quote="aturri"][quote="Lavir"][quote="geots"]

Ok, but if they wanted to hire you to make sure nothing like this happened again, (they wouldn't have the money to do it, but bear with me a moment) the first thing you would have to do is, if he was cheating, figure out how he did it. Because if you didn't know that, you couldn't stop it in the future. And as far as I know, no one has a clue how it was done- if in fact it was.


george[/quote]

There are too many possible ways in which one can organize the cheating and one can always invent new things. Establishing how it is done can be just impossible if you approach the thing directly. The best thing you can do is trying to prevent it (one possible way could be with an equipment that prevents any electronic apparel to function in the chess table, for example) and to understand with little doubt if cheating happened or not with indirect methods; this will have also, indirectly, the benefit of making you understand how the cheating was done.

Let's take what happened in this case as an example: the organizers approached the problem directly, with a search. They did found nothing. However cheating was much probably done. Result: the guy did what he wanted and the organizers didn't either find how he did it. If instead they tried to prevent cheating in some way (there are many possible solutions) or instead of searching the guy they would have tried to understand if he was cheating in an indirect way (as for example making him explain the moves or analyzing the previous game vs. the current ones as others have done etc.) they would have immediately discovered if something was odd and this would have even make them understand how the guy did it (the guy, with the back to the wall could even tell it himself).[/quote]

As there are many ways to cheat it is quite difficult to go catch it. If the players make the complaint and you actuate indirectly, perhaps the opponents feel even worse, as it seems you are doing nothing.

Anyway, we should remember the way it was used in the french scandal in the Oympiad: Internet -> Analyze at home -> send SMS (now wassup) to a watcher -> transmite the move to the player via prestablished signals (even just depending where you locate e.g.)

So delaying the relay of the moves on Internet still could be circunvented by a live watcher: it is unsound to delay also the moves to the live audience.

It is very difficult the labour of the arbiters and organizers..[/quote]
jefk

bob
Posts: 20920
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Birmingham, AL

Re: Cheating suspicion at the Zadar Open in Croatia

Post by bob » Wed Jan 16, 2013 5:50 pm

Adam Hair wrote:
bob wrote:It is just a matter of time before this becomes undetectable... guys don't have to leave the table to go to the restroom and such. Look up "Keith Taft". He built a computer (when smartphones and such were not even a dream) that he hid on his person, had hidden data input with switches inside his shoes, and had various ways of seeing the output (led's in his glasses, etc.). Humans are quite bright. Even creating a Faraday Cage around the playing hall wouldn't work because the computer he built had everything self-contained and didn't need to communicate with outside sources. I'd be completely surprised if someone hasn't tried this with chess by now.
I suppose cavity searches and making all competitors play au naturel would not be enough to prevent someone from finding a way to cheat.
It might certainly increase tournament participation, given some of the women chess players I have seen. :)

bob
Posts: 20920
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Birmingham, AL

Re: Cheating suspicion at the Zadar Open in Croatia

Post by bob » Wed Jan 16, 2013 5:51 pm

Adam Hair wrote:
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:
Adam Hair wrote:
bob wrote:It is just a matter of time before this becomes undetectable... guys don't have to leave the table to go to the restroom and such. Look up "Keith Taft". He built a computer (when smartphones and such were not even a dream) that he hid on his person, had hidden data input with switches inside his shoes, and had various ways of seeing the output (led's in his glasses, etc.). Humans are quite bright. Even creating a Faraday Cage around the playing hall wouldn't work because the computer he built had everything self-contained and didn't need to communicate with outside sources. I'd be completely surprised if someone hasn't tried this with chess by now.
I suppose cavity searches and making all competitors play au naturel would not be enough to prevent someone from finding a way to cheat.
Playing au naturel would be nice especialy in mixed tournaments :wink:
There was a complaint made in the past that a female opponent's top was too revealing. An au naturel mixed tournament would have made that fellow a drooling patzer :lol:
When David Levy played chess 4.x for the first Fredkin match in the 70.s, Dave Cahlander found a REALLY attractive female to "operate" for chess 4.x... She was told to "wear no more than the law requires" to keep David distracted. :) He used to enjoy telling that story, back in the day.

Lavir
Posts: 263
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 10:45 am

Re: Cheating suspicion at the Zadar Open in Croatia.

Post by Lavir » Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:15 pm

aturri wrote: As there are many ways to cheat it is quite difficult to go catch it. If the players make the complaint and you actuate indirectly, perhaps the opponents feel even worse, as it seems you are doing nothing.
How operating indirectly can give the impression of doing nothing? You still investigate. Actually this gives more pressure to the cheater, since with a simple search if you pass it you are done, with indirect methods the process is ongoing. For many this would be enough of a deterrent.

When you know that people are watching every thing you do very closely, you often do the mistakes that people are just asking for.

Dr.Ex
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 2:10 am

Re: Cheating suspicion at the Zadar Open in Croatia.

Post by Dr.Ex » Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:39 pm

Since when is Lilov a GM? He is FM.

User avatar
M ANSARI
Posts: 3467
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 6:10 pm

Re: Cheating suspicion at the Zadar Open in Croatia.

Post by M ANSARI » Thu Jan 17, 2013 5:21 pm

I was sort of feeling sorry for this guy because he was accused of cheating, and although I am 99% sure he was cheating, 1% is still quite a bit to destroy someone's reputation. But then I read this today

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8781

where he says:
How did you manage to beat the Croatian grandmasters?

I dont think there was anything special in my games at all. The Croatian GMs made some horrible mistakes during our games. Of course I practiced a lot with the computer, and after beating Rybka and Houdini by 10-0 each, i was absolutelly sure that no-one was gonna stop me winning. After all the arbiters were kind of polite and intelligent, you know, the other players weren't though....

He claims he beat both Rybka and Houdini 10-0 ... OK so now the 1% should be revised to probably about .00000000000000000000000000000000000000001% that he was NOT cheating.

noctiferus
Posts: 364
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 11:27 am
Location: Italy

Re: Cheating suspicion at the Zadar Open in Croatia.

Post by noctiferus » Thu Jan 17, 2013 10:00 pm

In your opinion, why did he make such an absurd statement, that worsens his credibility? Not even Carlsen could do honestly say it.

thx for your opinion.
e

Post Reply