Alleged 'Cheater' Kicked Out from Bulgarian Chess Federation

[Adam Hair]

A few people are calling for a higher standard of proof than the majority. This does not make them trolls. If you are the sort of person who assumes that people who do not share your opinion are trolls, you may want to avoid sunlight.

Calling people trolls, liars, cheaters, and stupid is far closer to trollish behavior than demanding that Ivanov be caught red-handed before condemning him, even if the majority of us believe there is sufficient evidence that he is cheating. This is where the hypocrisy lies.

For the record, posts are removed when members are unable to remain civil with each other. No post is removed due to personal conflict with the moderators. There are an ample amount of examples to support this assertion.

[Terry McCracken]

A few people are calling for a higher standard of proof than the majority. This does not make them trolls. If you are the sort of person who assumes that people who do not share your opinion are trolls, you may want to avoid sunlight.

Calling people trolls, liars, cheaters, and stupid is far closer to trollish behavior than demanding that Ivanov be caught red-handed before condemning him, even if the majority of us believe there is sufficient evidence that he is cheating. This is where the hypocrisy lies.

For the record, posts are removed when members are unable to remain civil with each other. No post is removed due to personal conflict with the moderators. There are an ample amount of examples to support this assertion.

Adam, speaking with nearly two decades of experience on the WWW, plus my knowledge of human behaviour, I can tell you right now these people don't need or want more proof, just a licence to play games and in some cases to justify cheating. If that isn't trolling than I don't know what is!

[Adam Hair]

A few people are calling for a higher standard of proof than the majority. This does not make them trolls. If you are the sort of person who assumes that people who do not share your opinion are trolls, you may want to avoid sunlight.

Calling people trolls, liars, cheaters, and stupid is far closer to trollish behavior than demanding that Ivanov be caught red-handed before condemning him, even if the majority of us believe there is sufficient evidence that he is cheating. This is where the hypocrisy lies.

For the record, posts are removed when members are unable to remain civil with each other. No post is removed due to personal conflict with the moderators. There are an ample amount of examples to support this assertion.

Adam, speaking with nearly two decades of experience on the WWW, plus my knowledge of human behaviour, I can tell you right now these people don't need or want more proof, just a licence to play games and in some cases to justify cheating. If that isn't trolling than I don't know what is!

So Ignacio, Gabor, Ray, and Lyudmil are trolls?

As I said, I believe there is sufficient evidence that Ivanov is cheating. But I would not scoff at someone who prefers more evidence. Remember, there are some members whose countries are not far removed from the days where an accusation was enough to justify imprisonment or worse. That is not the case here, but we are talking about banning someone from competing in chess. If some members are uncomfortable in condemning Ivanov because the evidence falls short of being conclusive, then I respect that.

[h1a8]

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.

Proven is not an opinion, it's a fact. You have circumstantial evidence but not proof. This is a fact. Calling it proof doesn't make it proof nor does it make you correct. I don't condone cheating but convicting guilty people without proof is a hell of a lot worst.

[M ANSARI]

A few people are calling for a higher standard of proof than the majority. This does not make them trolls. If you are the sort of person who assumes that people who do not share your opinion are trolls, you may want to avoid sunlight.

Calling people trolls, liars, cheaters, and stupid is far closer to trollish behavior than demanding that Ivanov be caught red-handed before condemning him, even if the majority of us believe there is sufficient evidence that he is cheating. This is where the hypocrisy lies.

For the record, posts are removed when members are unable to remain civil with each other. No post is removed due to personal conflict with the moderators. There are an ample amount of examples to support this assertion.

Adam, speaking with nearly two decades of experience on the WWW, plus my knowledge of human behaviour, I can tell you right now these people don't need or want more proof, just a licence to play games and in some cases to justify cheating. If that isn't trolling than I don't know what is!

So Ignacio, Gabor, Ray, and Lyudmil are trolls?

As I said, I believe there is sufficient evidence that Ivanov is cheating. But I would not scoff at someone who prefers more evidence. Remember, there are some members whose countries are not far removed from the days where an accusation was enough to justify imprisonment or worse. That is not the case here, but we are talking about banning someone from competing in chess. If some members are uncomfortable in condemning Ivanov because the evidence falls short of being conclusive, then I respect that.

I do agree that you need evidence before condemning someone and is a reason I have previously given Ivanov the benefit of the doubt. You have to understand this thing with Ivanov is something that has been going on for quite a while. He has not been singled out for no reason, there is a wealth of evidence against him (look at my previous postings where I have links). I think it is impossible for anyone on this forum (who are very well versed with how engines play and how they are different from humans) that can look at his obscure games that are 100% engine moves and not conclude he is cheating. The thing is that the punishment for cheating in competitive chess is negligible and the tools available to circumvent cheating are totally lacking. This creates a dilemma where it is very unfair for the victimized opponent who are spending thousands of hours practicing and working hard to honestly improve their game, and then get humiliated by someone who is cheating and using computer assistance. How about the honest gifted player who gives up competitive chess simply because he feels that he is just not good enough when he gets crushed and humiliated by someone who is several hundred ELO's weaker! Creeps like Ivanov have to be stopped, and if it takes invasive searches or simple chess skill tests in controlled conditions ... then be it. If competitive human chess is going to survive then cheating must be tackled and the punishment must be extremely severe ... a lifetime ban for anyone caught cheating seems more than appropriate, and personally for professional chess I think that they should add a criminal charge as well as it is stealing money from other honest competitors.

With the case where the Bulgarian Federation gave Ivanov a chance to clear his name. Their test was going to be some simple chess quizzes and maybe a few controlled games to test the strength of Ivanov. He had initially agreed to the tests but then he balked a day before saying that he had a competitive chess engagement that same day. It was a terrible excuse because only a few days earlier he had been complaining that he was banned from competing in that very same tournament because he had been accused of cheating. At that time the BCF banned him for 3 months for not showing up for that test, and then gave him another chance when that ban was lifted. And again he did not show up and thus they had enough of him. Bulgaria has some incredibly strong and talented chess players not least which is Topalov and Cheparinov, and their human chess talent runs very deep. You can be sure that they would love to have an extra addition to that team if he was as gifted as Ivanov claims he was. I mean to beat both Houdini and Rybka 10-0 is something I am sure no other human chess player can claim ... imagine Carlsen or Kramnik or Anand claiming that ... they would be laughed at hysterically! They gave him many chances to prove he was innocent, and show he is not a fraud. I imagine if Bobby Fischer or Kasparov or Carlsen were to be given a chess quiz to check their chess prowess, they would relish that idea. It is not one thing with Ivanov that proves he is a fraud, it is the accumulation of overwhelming evidence and data. Again it would be absolutely simple for him to prove he is not cheating but he has refused to do that. IMHO the chances of him actually playing the moves of the game I posted here is less than a 3 year old writing Hamlet!

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

A few people are calling for a higher standard of proof than the majority. This does not make them trolls. If you are the sort of person who assumes that people who do not share your opinion are trolls, you may want to avoid sunlight.

Calling people trolls, liars, cheaters, and stupid is far closer to trollish behavior than demanding that Ivanov be caught red-handed before condemning him, even if the majority of us believe there is sufficient evidence that he is cheating. This is where the hypocrisy lies.

For the record, posts are removed when members are unable to remain civil with each other. No post is removed due to personal conflict with the moderators. There are an ample amount of examples to support this assertion.

Adam, speaking with nearly two decades of experience on the WWW, plus my knowledge of human behaviour, I can tell you right now these people don't need or want more proof, just a licence to play games and in some cases to justify cheating. If that isn't trolling than I don't know what is!

So Ignacio, Gabor, Ray, and Lyudmil are trolls?

As I said, I believe there is sufficient evidence that Ivanov is cheating. But I would not scoff at someone who prefers more evidence. Remember, there are some members whose countries are not far removed from the days where an accusation was enough to justify imprisonment or worse. That is not the case here, but we are talking about banning someone from competing in chess. If some members are uncomfortable in condemning Ivanov because the evidence falls short of being conclusive, then I respect that.

I do agree that you need evidence before condemning someone and is a reason I have previously given Ivanov the benefit of the doubt. You have to understand this thing with Ivanov is something that has been going on for quite a while. He has not been singled out for no reason, there is a wealth of evidence against him (look at my previous postings where I have links). I think it is impossible for anyone on this forum (who are very well versed with how engines play and how they are different from humans) that can look at his obscure games that are 100% engine moves and not conclude he is cheating. The thing is that the punishment for cheating in competitive chess is negligible and the tools available to circumvent cheating are totally lacking. This creates a dilemma where it is very unfair for the victimized opponent who are spending thousands of hours practicing and working hard to honestly improve their game, and then get humiliated by someone who is cheating and using computer assistance. How about the honest gifted player who gives up competitive chess simply because he feels that he is just not good enough when he gets crushed and humiliated by someone who is several hundred ELO's weaker! Creeps like Ivanov have to be stopped, and if it takes invasive searches or simple chess skill tests in controlled conditions ... then be it. If competitive human chess is going to survive then cheating must be tackled and the punishment must be extremely severe ... a lifetime ban for anyone caught cheating seems more than appropriate, and personally for professional chess I think that they should add a criminal charge as well as it is stealing money from other honest competitors.

With the case where the Bulgarian Federation gave Ivanov a chance to clear his name. Their test was going to be some simple chess quizzes and maybe a few controlled games to test the strength of Ivanov. He had initially agreed to the tests but then he balked a day before saying that he had a competitive chess engagement that same day. It was a terrible excuse because only a few days earlier he had been complaining that he was banned from competing in that very same tournament because he had been accused of cheating. At that time the BCF banned him for 3 months for not showing up for that test, and then gave him another chance when that ban was lifted. And again he did not show up and thus they had enough of him. Bulgaria has some incredibly strong and talented chess players not least which is Topalov and Cheparinov, and their human chess talent runs very deep. You can be sure that they would love to have an extra addition to that team if he was as gifted as Ivanov claims he was. I mean to beat both Houdini and Rybka 10-0 is something I am sure no other human chess player can claim ... imagine Carlsen or Kramnik or Anand claiming that ... they would be laughed at hysterically! They gave him many chances to prove he was innocent, and show he is not a fraud. I imagine if Bobby Fischer or Kasparov or Carlsen were to be given a chess quiz to check their chess prowess, they would relish that idea. It is not one thing with Ivanov that proves he is a fraud, it is the accumulation of overwhelming evidence and data. Again it would be absolutely simple for him to prove he is not cheating but he has refused to do that. IMHO the chances of him actually playing the moves of the game I posted here is less than a 3 year old writing Hamlet!

Mr. Ansari,

the only difference between Borislav and other top Bulgarian players is that he trains twice as much, so if they would train4 hours per day, as Topalov says he trains 3 per day, he would train 8.

The BCF did not invite him to a chess quiz or a friendly game, but to a lie detector test. I do not give the link right now, but in the net there is an interview of Danailov to the Times of India, where he says that they came up with the lie detector test after the police ensured them this was a very reliant way to investigate whether a person is lying, failing only in some 3% of the cases. Now, I doubt the 3% figure, I think it is much higher, but even it is just 3%, would the BCF accept the result of a test involving a realistic possibility of inaccuracy? Who needs such a test.

If such tests were good in criminal trials, then all judges and juries would decide just relying on them. But they do not do so, and therefore you always need some much more direct and substantial evidence than the fact if your eye blinks or not at a certain point of time.

Maybe someone might give more info on the lie detector tests accuracy rate, I would appreciate that very much.

Kind trollish regards, Lyudmil

PS. You are right, Bulgarians are not that bad at chess, actually we have world champions for men (although Topalov was just a FIDE champion), women (Antoaneta Stefanova), seniors (Lyuben Spassov), etc. So why not have one more example in that connection, for example Ivanov as most rapidly progressing player? I wonder how many nations of just 8 million have world chess champions in all those categories?

[Henk]

Give Ivanov also a price for most innovative magician or best artist.

[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.

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.

We will speak again in a couple of months' time, when it becomes evident he hides nothing.

[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.

Proven is not an opinion, it's a fact. You have circumstantial evidence but not proof. This is a fact. Calling it proof doesn't make it proof nor does it make you correct. I don't condone cheating but convicting guilty people without proof is a hell of a lot worst.

Again, you say we have only circumstantial evidence but not a proof. I say we have not only circumstantial evidence but a proof. This is not only my opinion but a fact. But you deny the fact. And again you don't see the other side of the medal. If we don't convict guilty people although it is proven like in this case is a hell, too.

[casaschi]

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.

Ivanov was already banned by the Bulgarian chess federation for 4 months earlier. However, before the end of that 4 month period that decision was overruled by a Bulgarian tribunal. As you can see, beside internet trolls, also the Bulgarian judicial system did not agree on banning Ivanov.

Convicting someone for chess cheating without proving they are guilty is fundamentally wrong.

It's wrong for the convicted person in the first place.

It is also wrong for the chess world in general, because we'll never know what exactly happened and how exactly Ivanov was cheating. Assuming he was in fact cheating, this confusion and these arbitrary decisions only play to his favor. Much better to wait until the mystery is solved rather than swiping the dirt under the carpet.