Alleged 'Cheater' Kicked Out from Bulgarian Chess Federation

[M ANSARI]

Here is a typical game of Ivanov's. Some incredibly odd moves that make absolutely no sense. Some moves that look like they are suicide ... yet they pan out tactically brilliantly. Copy and paste the game and run it while having Houdini running ... 100% match with Houdini from the first couple of moves ... 100%. If the game was clear cut and obvious moves were being played I could say maybe this was just brilliance, but the game includes some obscure moves that make no sense positionally but with deep tactical calculation they seem to be valid! I will not choose some positions and annotate the game as I would probably run out of !!! Play the game through, run the engine and watch the output, and imagine the sad humiliation of the human having to endure this over the board.

[pgn]1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. g3 Bb4 4. Bd2 c5 5. Bxb4 cxb4 6. Bg2 O-O 7. Nf3 d6 8. O-O Qe7 9. a3 bxa3 10. Rxa3 b6 11. Nc3 Bb7 12. d5 e5 13. Nh4 g6 14. Qd2 Nh5 15. Qh6 f5 16. e4 Ng7 17. exf5 gxf5 18. Nb5 Rf6 19. Qg5 Qf7 20. Rxa7 Rxa7 21. Nxa7 f4 22. Ra1 Na6 23. Nc6 Bc8 24. Nf5 Bxf5 25. Rxa6 h6 26. Qh4 Bd3 27. Rxb6 e4 28. Rb7 Qxb7 29. Qxf6 e3 30. fxe3 fxe3 31. Ne7 Kh7 32. Qf8 h5 33. Qg8 Kh6 34. Qh8 Bh7 35. Be4[/pgn]

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

Here is a typical game of Ivanov's. Some incredibly odd moves that make absolutely no sense. Some moves that look like they are suicide ... yet they pan out tactically brilliantly. Copy and paste the game and run it while having Houdini running ... 100% match with Houdini from the first couple of moves ... 100%. If the game was clear cut and obvious moves were being played I could say maybe this was just brilliance, but the game includes some obscure moves that make no sense positionally but with deep tactical calculation they seem to be valid! I will not choose some positions and annotate the game as I would probably run out of !!! Play the game through, run the engine and watch the output, and imagine the sad humiliation of the human having to endure this over the board.

[pgn]1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. g3 Bb4 4. Bd2 c5 5. Bxb4 cxb4 6. Bg2 O-O 7. Nf3 d6 8. O-O Qe7 9. a3 bxa3 10. Rxa3 b6 11. Nc3 Bb7 12. d5 e5 13. Nh4 g6 14. Qd2 Nh5 15. Qh6 f5 16. e4 Ng7 17. exf5 gxf5 18. Nb5 Rf6 19. Qg5 Qf7 20. Rxa7 Rxa7 21. Nxa7 f4 22. Ra1 Na6 23. Nc6 Bc8 24. Nf5 Bxf5 25. Rxa6 h6 26. Qh4 Bd3 27. Rxb6 e4 28. Rb7 Qxb7 29. Qxf6 e3 30. fxe3 fxe3 31. Ne7 Kh7 32. Qf8 h5 33. Qg8 Kh6 34. Qh8 Bh7 35. Be4[/pgn]

Now, this is really the one suspicious game of all he played. There are indeed a couple of moves that look very much engine-like, however, statistics people here will tell you that in a single game it is possible to play like a computer. Besides, the moves played were probably one of very few leading to a win, so if you know there is a win and look for it, you might be able to play even some strictly engine moves.

But again, this is the single most suspicious game, other Ivanov games are much simpler.

Regarding what Carl says about his refusal to fully cooperate with searchers, but Carl you are really not quite right here. There were 2 instances where he refused to cooperate:

- In Blagoevgrad, where he refused to take off his shoes. But Carl, they checked him there with a metal detector, there wre special devices that would not make it possible to send signals out of the playing hall, what else do you need to be certain cheating possibilities are zero? Then Dlugy wants him to remove his shoes, why should he do that, if all security requirements have already been provided for? This is already an infringement on one's personal freedom. And it came very unexpected. If you are hunted down like a criminal and subjected to unnecessary checks every single tournament, but people, there is a limit to this, he is a simple human, with his emotions, he can not stand anything.

- In Navalmoral, they also checked him for electronic devices, and requested that he took off his shoes. He says, OK, do you want me also to take off my trousers (and this is already said with irony, you should understand). So, he took off his shoes, but said he would not strip naked. The Guliev wants him to strip naked. He has already said he will not do so, and, as the arbiters support Guliev, prefers to leave the tournament instead of being humiliated again. Anything more natural than that? This is a normal person, with his emotions, etc.

[h1a8]

He was kicked out by the Bulgarian CF because he is an embarrassment to other honest Bulgarians that are competing professionally in chess. I think if there was even a slight chance he was innocent, his own federation would fight for him tooth and nail. His case is so obvious that I think it is laughable that some are trying to defend him. Either that or they simply have not gone through the wealth of information and evidence that PROVES beyond a doubt that Ivanov was cheating. Plus he WAS caught with an electronic device in Spain although the reports do not mention that clearly. He immediately decided to withdraw from the tournament when the searcher felt something taped under his chest. He had no problems taking off his shoes and trousers, but going topless was too much for him. By law the searcher had no authority to continue to check him if he stopped consenting and withdrew from the tournament, so unfortunately he was not forced to reveal all. If it was me I would have done much more, but the guy doing the search was more interested in just removing him from the tournament and avoiding further scandal that could affect their tourney negatively, and am sure did not want to break any possible laws. To use that episode as an excuse that NOTHING WAS FOUND THUS HE IS NOT GUILTY is just silly. I think it is imperative that other honest competing professional chess players be protected from dick heads like Ivanov, and if it requires removing shoes or some other procedure that tries to circumvent cheating ... then all should be for it! Some might think it ridiculous that you have to be thoroughly searched and scanned before a flight, but it is now unfortunately a way of life and we accept it. I certainly would not want to get on a flight today that had zero search of passengers and their belongings!

The problem is not whether he is innocent or guilty but convicting someone without proving that they're guilty. Doing this creates huge problems for the future, a slippery slope pandora's box with no defined limit to what degree one can be convicted without proof. So even if he was guilty, it is better not to punish him for the sake of others in the future.

[Stefan Schiffermueller]

The problem is not whether he is innocent or guilty but convicting someone without proving that they're guilty.

You say it is not proven. I say it is proven. At the end we have to make a decision. The Bulgarian chess organisation made a decision, a good one, but much to late.

Doing this creates huge problems for the future, a slippery slope pandora's box with no defined limit to what degree one can be convicted without proof.

It would also open the pandora's box if we don't punish someone who is obviously and proven guilty. Because potential criminals would be encouraged and produce more victims.

So even if he was guilty, it is better not to punish him for the sake of others in the future.

You see only one side of the medal. We not only have to protect people from false accusation but also from being victims of criminals.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

You say it is not proven. I say it is proven. At the end we have to make a decision. The Bulgarian chess organisation made a decision, a good one, but much to late.

This is not an election campaign, to count votes.
In order to decide that he is cheating, you need:

a) a photo of the device he allegedly uses, or
b) police report, confirmed with the signatures of at least 2 people who were direct witnesses while conducting a search on him, stipulating that the suspicious device has been found.

As we have neither a, nor b, he is as innocent as a baby girl.

[Stefan Schiffermueller]

You say it is not proven. I say it is proven. At the end we have to make a decision. The Bulgarian chess organisation made a decision, a good one, but much to late.

This is not an election campaign, to count votes.

I never spoke about an election campaign. But thanks for the good idea. In this case the trolls would be outvoted.

In order to decide that he is cheating, you need:

a) a photo of the device he allegedly uses, or
b) police report, confirmed with the signatures of at least 2 people who were direct witnesses while conducting a search on him, stipulating that the suspicious device has been found.

As we have neither a, nor b, he is as innocent as a baby girl.

Who says that you need a) and b) ? You ? You can list a lot of proofs we don't have. But this is irrelevant. It is only relevant if we have a proof or not. And we have c), d), e), ...

[michiguel]

You say it is not proven. I say it is proven. At the end we have to make a decision. The Bulgarian chess organisation made a decision, a good one, but much to late.

This is not an election campaign, to count votes.

I never spoke about an election campaign. But thanks for the good idea. In this case the trolls would be outvoted.

Why is not possible to have a decent discussion without calling the opposing view, as we have seen in this thread, "stupid", "cheaters", and "trolls"?

Miguel

In order to decide that he is cheating, you need:

a) a photo of the device he allegedly uses, or
b) police report, confirmed with the signatures of at least 2 people who were direct witnesses while conducting a search on him, stipulating that the suspicious device has been found.

As we have neither a, nor b, he is as innocent as a baby girl.

Who says that you need a) and b) ? You ? You can list a lot of proofs we don't have. But this is irrelevant. It is only relevant if we have a proof or not. And we have c), d), e), ...

[Terry McCracken]

You say it is not proven. I say it is proven. At the end we have to make a decision. The Bulgarian chess organisation made a decision, a good one, but much to late.

This is not an election campaign, to count votes.
In order to decide that he is cheating, you need:

a) a photo of the device he allegedly uses, or
b) police report, confirmed with the signatures of at least 2 people who were direct witnesses while conducting a search on him, stipulating that the suspicious device has been found.

As we have neither a, nor b, he is as innocent as a baby girl.

That's absurd! You don't like the process, too bad. It is impossible to see what he is doing as he refuses to comply. That is his choice! Naturally there is no other option than to ban him. Sports organizations don't need to have police reports or a guilty verdict in court to ban someone. An honest player would comply if chess and self-respect is important to them to clear their name. Ivanov has made his decision. Of course if he is cheating no way in hell will he comply and risk a lot more than embarrassment!

If you think that is unfair or this means he may be innocent that is how the pieces drop.

[Terry McCracken]

You say it is not proven. I say it is proven. At the end we have to make a decision. The Bulgarian chess organisation made a decision, a good one, but much to late.

This is not an election campaign, to count votes.

I never spoke about an election campaign. But thanks for the good idea. In this case the trolls would be outvoted.

Why is not possible to have a decent discussion without calling the opposing view, as we have seen in this thread, "stupid", "cheaters", and "trolls"?

Miguel

In order to decide that he is cheating, you need:

a) a photo of the device he allegedly uses, or
b) police report, confirmed with the signatures of at least 2 people who were direct witnesses while conducting a search on him, stipulating that the suspicious device has been found.

As we have neither a, nor b, he is as innocent as a baby girl.

Who says that you need a) and b) ? You ? You can list a lot of proofs we don't have. But this is irrelevant. It is only relevant if we have a proof or not. And we have c), d), e), ...

If you have to ask the question, Miguel, then you don't see the problem.

[Milos]

If you have to ask the question, Miguel, then you don't see the problem.

He is just pretending not to see the problem because it suits him.
He advises civilized discussion with trolls?!! How ridiculous is that.
For him trolling is not against charter and it's completely fine, however when he has a personal conflict then ppl get their posts removed for far more benign content. That's called hypocrisy.