Borislav Ivanov: a Lilov's add-on

[mwyoung]

it is possible to shorten a quote, and it is not forbidden, afaik

The abuse of the quote function is a general habit on this forum. It makes almost any longer discussion totally, but really totally unreadable. Please, use some sense, people ...

No don't shorten a quote. My post was deleted for shorting Terry McCracken quote. To the part I only agreed with Terry in his quote, and saying we agree on something.

[mwyoung]

I think that there is a difference between the case that you describe and a case when many chess players suspect that you are cheating that is borislav ivanov's case.

If many people think that I am quilty of something then I prefer to protect
my name by proving that I am not quilty.

There are not many people who thought that you are quilty in
the case that the officer asked to search your car so I do not think that the fact that you did not give your consent to search is an evidence that you are quilty.

I personally am thankful that there are means in place to protect our rights but I also am a strong believer in balance. Some people are so sensitive and touchy that if you look at them cross-eyed the cry about their rights being violated. And what is pretty clear is that protection will always require a certain amount of inconvenience. So if you become the victim of a crime almost anyone wants a little justice for themselves or their family but they don't want to be inconvenienced otherwise. The random stops were done legally and for a reason - and is NOT an abuse of power but is intended to be a protection. If all you have to do is say no, I don't see what the problem is.

Now if someone gets pulled over for speeding I have been told by a police that a high percentage of people cry abuse and get real nasty and they are trained to be courteous and kind to make it as least unpleasant as possible. But without this there would be MANY more traffic deaths.

In Ivanov's case there is far more than the needed evidence for just cause - in fact it's clear cut. But to pretend that nothing is wrong and there is no evidence whatsoever as Mark implied is nuts. And it's even more nuts to have him refer to Ivanov's victims as a criminal mob for trying to protect themselves, at great inconvenience to themselves. He is saying that the majority of players over 2400 are criminals with a mob mentality and that Ivanov is the victim.

FIDE seems to be moving slowly - but their may be a method to their madness. We should reserve judgment on that. My first instinct here is that they are paid bureaucrats with less concern over the membership of FIDE who they represent than their own positions, but it does occur to me that as bureaucrats it is to be expected that they move slow like molasses. I can only assume there is a vigorous discussion on this and that eventually something will be done. They may also have super-conservative people on their board who are opposing any action out of fear. This is pure speculation, I know nothing of their power structure but it's this way in virtual any man-made organization.

You can't have it both ways.

Either your contention that the evidence is clear cut is correct. Then Fide is nuts, the Police is nuts, and IM Martian is Nuts, and myself and the many others that think the evidence is not clear cut.

Or you are not correct and the evidence is not clear cut. And Fide, IM Martian, myself, and many others are not nuts.

And maybe you should look at yourself...

No one said there was not anything strange going on, and you should not investigate. That is being done.

But if they listen to people like you that have your opinion of how the rules of evidence should work, and how the laws should work. All they would do is slander someone who is being investigated, and the person could never be charged. That person could sue, guilty or not.

The only reason why Ivanov has not been charged is because the EVIDENCE IS NOT CLEAR CUT. I see you are not able to separate you personal feelings that Ivanov must be guilty for the evidence.

I feel the same way you do. I have said this more then once. But I understand the evidence is not there. And I won't say Ivanov is guilty without seeing the charges and evidence that back up the charges.

[Terry McCracken]

it is possible to shorten a quote, and it is not forbidden, afaik

The abuse of the quote function is a general habit on this forum. It makes almost any longer discussion totally, but really totally unreadable. Please, use some sense, people ...

No don't shorten a quote. My post was deleted for shorting Terry McCracken quote. To the part I only agreed with Terry in his quote, and saying we agree on something.

Stop it Mark! It wasn't deleted for the reasons you stated. It was a direct attempt to say Terry is stupid.

BTW, the FIDE has had a long time to gather evidence but it has done little to nothing in this case and I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to act.

However, I think Ivanov should be invited to a super tournament and be prepped for the title of WCC! I think you will find his powers to be a local phenomenon.

[Don]

You can't have it both ways.

Either your contention that the evidence is clear cut is correct. Then Fide is nuts, the Police is nuts, and IM Martian is Nuts, and myself and the many others that think the evidence is not clear cut.

The evidence is clear cut to me, but I'm ok with those who are cautious. But I think anyone who thinks he is not guilty at all is nuts. You said there was no evidence whatsoever so I think you are not a very rational thinker.

Or you are not correct and the evidence is not clear cut. And Fide, IM Martian, myself, and many others are not nuts.

It not a boolean function, all evidence falls into a range of 0% to 100%. Even I stand and watch you shoot someone and they die, the evidence is not 100% - it's 99.9999% or something. It's always possible you had a twin brother who did it, or someone who looks strikingly like you. I am not one who believes you have to have 100% proof because that is impossible. It's not possible to prove anyone did anything with 100% confidence and in the U.S. justice system it has to be beyond reasonable doubt. It's not an issue for you since you don't think there is any evidence. You think it's zero and that is why I see you as being almost crazy.

And maybe you should look at yourself...

No one said there was not anything strange going on, and you should not investigate. That is being done.

I am not investigating anything any more than you are serving as the defense attorney. If you think I am investigation and it's wrong then why do you think you are right to play his defender?

But if they listen to people like you that have your opinion of how the rules of evidence should work, and how the laws should work. All they would do is slander someone who is being investigated, and the person could never be charged. That person could sue, guilty or not.

The only reason why Ivanov has not been charged is because the EVIDENCE IS NOT CLEAR CUT. I see you are not able to separate you personal feelings that Ivanov must be guilty for the evidence.

I feel the same way you do. I have said this more then once. But I understand the evidence is not there. And I won't say Ivanov is guilty without seeing the charges and evidence that back up the charges.

This is not what you said earlier, you directly implied there was no evidence whatsoever. Now you are changing?

Here is what you said:

And the evidence we have is ivanon supports his chin with his hands and looks at the board the whole game.

So basically you consider the chin thing the only evidence that I had - and your sarcasm indicates that you don't think that is evidence either. Now you are saying that this isn't the only evidence I had?

[mwyoung]

Now Don. I have made many post on this subject. On more then just this site. The problem with some is if I challenge the evidence you project to know what I personally think. I can separate my feelings from what it takes to prove this case against Ivanov. It would not be fair to slander Ivanov on what I think maybe true. Because I could be wrong given the current state of the known evidence.

[noctiferus]

Some legal aspects sre discussed here:

http://www.chessbase.com/Home/TabId/211 ... 30713.aspx

[Don]

Now Don. I have made many post on this subject. On more then just this site. The problem with some is if I challenge the evidence you project to know what I personally think. I can separate my feelings from what it takes to prove this case against Ivanov. It would not be fair to slander Ivanov on what I think maybe true. Because I could be wrong given the current state of the known evidence.

One must always use caution before making an accusation as the accusation itself can do a lot of damage. I understand that completely. I have been victimized by this myself and probably so have most people. But at some point you have to be willing to cross that threshold when victims are involved. In this case there is trail of victims who were defrauded out of potential money and tournament titles - players who might have won the tournament if he had not been there. Even if you were not a contender many strong players take their ratings seriously and in a sense rating points were taken from them unfairly.

I use the analogy of a violent crime and how it's handled by the justice system. When it's suspected that someone has committed a rape for example, the justice system (when properly working) will take steps to protect society by quickly determining if the accusation or evidence is strong enough to support an arrest. An arrest is NOT a conviction however and it might not even be a trial - that has to be determined by a hearing. So it proceeds in stages - in order to protect both the victim and the accused. It's a balanced approach.

I think where you are going wrong is that you do not acknowledge that process even though you claim to respect it. Your idea of due processes is that he cannot even be accused of anything unless you have absolute proof. And if anyone dares to speculate that it might be true, they are part of a "mob mentality." You have labelled the victims as criminal and the accused as being victimized by the process. The evidence is overwhelming that he is cheating - but even if we give a little margin of error for the doubt that some may have, it has passed well beyond the point of "unfounded accusation" and into the realm of a credible arrest. Of course we don't expect an actual arrest because this is not an actual court case here but if there were it would probably be at the stage of a court hearing.

Having said that, I believe that FIDE, if they are really serious about cheating, should press charges legally. Even though this will cost them a great deal of money, it would send a very strong signal that this is something they take seriously, that it's a crime and that there are victims who must be protected. The next cheater would have to think twice.

[Don]

Now Don. I have made many post on this subject. On more then just this site. The problem with some is if I challenge the evidence you project to know what I personally think. I can separate my feelings from what it takes to prove this case against Ivanov. It would not be fair to slander Ivanov on what I think maybe true. Because I could be wrong given the current state of the known evidence.

One must always use caution before making an accusation as the accusation itself can do a lot of damage. I understand that completely. I have been victimized by this myself and probably so have most people. But at some point you have to be willing to cross that threshold when victims are involved. In this case there is trail of victims who were defrauded out of potential money and tournament titles - players who might have won the tournament if he had not been there. Even if you were not a contender many strong players take their ratings seriously and in a sense rating points were taken from them unfairly.

I use the analogy of a violent crime and how it's handled by the justice system. When it's suspected that someone has committed a rape for example, the justice system (when properly working) will take steps to protect society by quickly determining if the accusation or evidence is strong enough to support an arrest. An arrest is NOT a conviction however and it might not even be a trial - that has to be determined by a hearing. So it proceeds in stages - in order to protect both the victim and the accused. It's a balanced approach.

I think where you are going wrong is that you do not acknowledge that process even though you claim to respect it. Your idea of due processes is that he cannot even be accused of anything unless you have absolute proof. And if anyone dares to speculate that it might be true, they are part of a "mob mentality." You have labelled the victims as criminal and the accused as being victimized by the process. The evidence is overwhelming that he is cheating - but even if we give a little margin of error for the doubt that some may have, it has passed well beyond the point of "unfounded accusation" and into the realm of a credible arrest. Of course we don't expect an actual arrest because this is not an actual court case here but if there were it would probably be at the stage of a court hearing.

Having said that, I believe that FIDE, if they are really serious about cheating, should press charges legally. Even though this will cost them a great deal of money, it would send a very strong signal that this is something they take seriously, that it's a crime and that there are victims who must be protected. The next cheater would have to think twice.

I want to add something to this. Don't imagine that the only victims of this are the ones playing in the tournament he is in. YOU are one of the victims and so am I. This is potential very damaging to chess in general, the game you and I love. It has destroyed the prestige of these tournaments and perhaps tournaments to come and support by strong players will start to diminish if this becomes a common practice. So this goes WAY BEYOND just this one boy having a little fun.

[mwyoung]

Some legal aspects sre discussed here:

http://www.chessbase.com/Home/TabId/211 ... 30713.aspx

This artical paints a even bleaker picture of proving Ivanov's guilt with the current state of evidence then I have stated in my post.

[carldaman]

Having said that, I believe that FIDE, if they are really serious about cheating, should press charges legally. Even though this will cost them a great deal of money, it would send a very strong signal that this is something they take seriously, that it's a crime and that there are victims who must be protected. The next cheater would have to think twice.

According to this article,

http://www.chessbase.com/Home/TabId/211 ... 30713.aspx

proper anti-cheating FIDE rules aren't even in place. In particular, no tangible punishment is stipulated for cheaters. This latter detail probably ties FIDE's hands from pursuing any punitive action at the moment, assuming they even gathered thorough evidence in this case, which in itself is doubtful.