Chess Cheater - Demands For Death Penalty!

[Sean Evans]

Zurab Azmaiparashvili: "Gaioz Nigalidze Should Be Banned for One-Two Years Maximum"

Monday, 04.05.2015 19:36

The President of the European Chess Union Zurab Azmaiparashvili comments on the situation surrounding the Georgian player Gaioz Nigalidze, who was recently caught cheating.

"I was very angry with Nigalidze, when I first heard about it, but could not react for several days", Azmaiparashvili was quoted as saying by the Georgian newspaper "Palitra Nedelyi". - "I decided to await other people's reaction. But people have been too harsh with him, virtually demanding the death sentence".

"Gaioz is guilty and should be punished, but he has not done anything deserving the death penalty. The chess program he was using could be compared in strength with light doping", the ECU President said.

"The guilty must be punished, but we should acknowledge that he has admitted his guilt, and we should also take into account the difficult financial situation faced by his family. It seems to me that Nigalidze should be banned for one or two years maximum. That way, he will receive a bitter blow and learn the appropriate lesson, but we will not throw down the drain all the efforts this talented young man has made to improve his chess".

[Matthias Gemuh]

Code: Select all

... the efforts this talented young man ...

Since when has hiding a phone in a toilet become a talent ?

[Dirt]

... But people have been too harsh with him, virtually demanding the death sentence".

"Gaioz is guilty and should be punished, but he has not done anything deserving the death penalty.

No, of course he shouldn't be killed. Just ban him from chess. The idea that banning him from chess is equivalent to a death penalty is just sick.

[syzygy]

... But people have been too harsh with him, virtually demanding the death sentence".

"Gaioz is guilty and should be punished, but he has not done anything deserving the death penalty.

No, of course he shouldn't be killed. Just ban him from chess. The idea that banning him from chess is equivalent to a death penalty is just sick.

I don't think that's what was implied. Azmaiparashvili himself said a ban is OK.

His point seems to be that, at least in his perception, some people reacted as if Gaioz has done something that did deserve the death penalty. Of course he has not.

[APassionForCriminalJustic]

[quote="Matthias Gemuh"]

Code: Select all

... the efforts this talented young man ...[/n]

Since when has hiding a phone in a toilet become a talent ?[/quote]

He is a grandmaster (only the absolute best talent become GMs; heck most persons do not even reach 1800 Elo). That is what is meant by "this talented young man". He cheats, fine. There are reasons, considered quite legitimate, as to why he did what he did. Banning him for a couple of years sounds proportionate to what he did wrong. Obviously this guy is a seriously strong chess player - that cannot be effectively denounced or go unnoticed. Therefore, the person(s) handing down this fellow's judgment must take that into an enormous account. There are no shortcuts to becoming a grandmaster - this man has invested thousands upon thousands of hours into his game. Cheating or not, there is always more to the story.

The death penalty is disgusting period; people demanding death over this is beyond pathetically disgusting. But I am not surprised; this planet is full of utter nonsense, politics, and stupidity. 

Welcome to the age of technology.

[Uri Blass]

[quote="APassionForCriminalJustic"][quote="Matthias Gemuh"]

Code: Select all

... the efforts this talented young man ...[/n]

Since when has hiding a phone in a toilet become a talent ?[/quote]

He is a grandmaster (only the absolute best talent become GMs; heck most persons do not even reach 1800 Elo). That is what is meant by "this talented young man". He cheats, fine. There are reasons, considered quite legitimate, as to why he did what he did. Banning him for a couple of years sounds proportionate to what he did wrong. Obviously this guy is a seriously strong chess player - that cannot be effectively denounced or go unnoticed. Therefore, the person(s) handing down this fellow's judgment must take that into an enormous account. There are no shortcuts to becoming a grandmaster - this man has invested thousands upon thousands of hours into his game. Cheating or not, there is always more to the story.

The death penalty is disgusting period; people demanding death over this is beyond pathetically disgusting. But I am not surprised; this planet is full of utter nonsense, politics, and stupidity. 

Welcome to the age of technology.[/quote]


The point is that cheating can be a shortcut to becoming a grandmaster.

We do not know his real playing strength without cheating.

I guess that  he is at level of 2400 without cheating but it is also possible that he is not stronger than 1800 without cheating.

[Terry McCracken]

... But people have been too harsh with him, virtually demanding the death sentence".

"Gaioz is guilty and should be punished, but he has not done anything deserving the death penalty.

No, of course he shouldn't be killed. Just ban him from chess. The idea that banning him from chess is equivalent to a death penalty is just sick.

I don't think that's what was implied. Azmaiparashvili himself said a ban is OK.

His point seems to be that, at least in his perception, some people reacted as if Gaioz has done something that did deserve the death penalty. Of course he has not.

Might be a good idea. Cheating would come to an end pretty quick!

[Terry McCracken]

... But people have been too harsh with him, virtually demanding the death sentence".

"Gaioz is guilty and should be punished, but he has not done anything deserving the death penalty.

No, of course he shouldn't be killed. Just ban him from chess. The idea that banning him from chess is equivalent to a death penalty is just sick.

Sounds like a great idea!

[Terry McCracken]

[quote="Uri Blass"][quote="APassionForCriminalJustic"][quote="Matthias Gemuh"]

Code: Select all

... the efforts this talented young man ...[/n]

Since when has hiding a phone in a toilet become a talent ?[/quote]

He is a grandmaster (only the absolute best talent become GMs; heck most persons do not even reach 1800 Elo). That is what is meant by "this talented young man". He cheats, fine. There are reasons, considered quite legitimate, as to why he did what he did. Banning him for a couple of years sounds proportionate to what he did wrong. Obviously this guy is a seriously strong chess player - that cannot be effectively denounced or go unnoticed. Therefore, the person(s) handing down this fellow's judgment must take that into an enormous account. There are no shortcuts to becoming a grandmaster - this man has invested thousands upon thousands of hours into his game. Cheating or not, there is always more to the story.

The death penalty is disgusting period; people demanding death over this is beyond pathetically disgusting. But I am not surprised; this planet is full of utter nonsense, politics, and stupidity. 

Welcome to the age of technology.[/quote]


The point is that cheating can be a shortcut to becoming a grandmaster.

We do not know his real playing strength without cheating.

I guess that  he is at level of 2400 without cheating but it is also possible that he is not stronger than 1800 without cheating.[/quote]

AFAIK he is a GM but when in Rome....

[Dirt]

No, of course he shouldn't be killed. Just ban him from chess. The idea that banning him from chess is equivalent to a death penalty is just sick.

I don't think that's what was implied. Azmaiparashvili himself said a ban is OK.

His point seems to be that, at least in his perception, some people reacted as if Gaioz has done something that did deserve the death penalty. Of course he has not.

I don't think so. He claims the maximum penalty should be 2 years away from chess. I think he is equating a lifetime ban with the death penalty.

Personally, I think the minimum penalty should be three years, or a lifetime ban would be fine, too. But definitely no death penalty.