Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

ICU Easter Open

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    anchor4208
    Registered Users Posts: 104 ✭✭anchor4208


    It's made the papers finally, although the perp hasn't been named
    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/student-barred-from-top-chess-tournament-in-dublin-amid-cheating-claims-38082084.html


  • Options
    #63
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    He should be named and the ICU should have written a report on the whole matter on the ICU website. Cheats need to be properly punished.


  • Options
    #64
    Tim Harding
    Closed Accounts Posts: 954 ✭✭✭Tim Harding


    sodacat11 wrote: »
    He should be named and the ICU should have written a report on the whole matter on the ICU website. Cheats need to be properly punished.

    I believe that the ICU are following correct procedures to collect witness statements in order to prepare disciplinary proceedings and a case for submission to FIDE and the home federation of the player concerned.
    I do hope, though, that they are privately warning all tournament organisers in Ireland, north and south, not to accept any entry from the player concerned or his associates.


  • Options
    #65
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    The correct procedure would have been to string him up by the goolies the day he was caught.
    As for witness statements. I stood behind him staring at his friend in the light blue ensemble who was standing opposite. He couldn't make any hand signals while I was there so the cheat kept looking up at him wondering what was going on. I must have stood there for ten minutes and no move was made in that time but then I had to go back to my own game so no doubt he was then able to resume playing like Stockfish as he had in the previous rounds.


  • Options
    #66
    Tim Harding
    Closed Accounts Posts: 954 ✭✭✭Tim Harding


    sodacat11 wrote: »
    The correct procedure would have been to string him up by the goolies the day he was caught...

    A lynch mob! So nineteenth century...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    Tim Harding wrote: »
    A lynch mob! So nineteenth century...

    Where there is no doubt about guilt I would prefer my solution to having criminals with long records getting free legal aid, the presumption of innocence, their past record of crimes witheld from a jury and then being acquitted because of some legal loophole or technicality.
    In chess terms, better that when an offender is caught red handed he is clipped around the earhole or flushed down a toilet along with his smartphone than the following of "correct procedure" which almost invariably results in a slap on the wrist.


  • Options
    #68
    Ficheall
    Registered Users Posts: 9,018 ✭✭✭Ficheall


    sodacat11 wrote: »
    Where there is no doubt about guilt
    Were you not initially convinced that he was sandbagging/playing under a false name, etc?


  • Options
    #69
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    Ficheall wrote: »
    Were you not initially convinced that he was sandbagging/playing under a false name, etc?
    Yep, they were the two most likely scenarios. I don't think that the use of a computer occurred to me but I did suspect that the guy watching his games was at least in on the scam whatever it was.


  • Options
    #70
    Ficheall
    Registered Users Posts: 9,018 ✭✭✭Ficheall


    sodacat11 wrote: »
    Yep, they were the two most likely scenarios. I don't think that the use of a computer occurred to me but I did suspect that the guy watching his games was at least in on the scam whatever it was.
    You suspected the guy watching his games was helping him to sandbag or play under a false name?


  • Options
    #71
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    Ficheall wrote: »
    You suspected the guy watching his games was helping him to sandbag or play under a false name?
    You are being silly now.
    I knew there was something fishy going on, I thought that the cheat was indeed sandbagging and that maybe his "spectator" was perhaps a very strong player. If you had seen the guy and the way he was behaving you couldn't help but be suspicious. It would be highly unusual for someone to have a friend who wasn't a chess player stand beside his board for every game and if the guy was a chess player then why wasn't he playing?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Ficheall
    Registered Users Posts: 9,018 ✭✭✭Ficheall


    sodacat11 wrote: »
    I knew there was something fishy going on
    You said it was a duck though...


    You said (if you'll permit me to paraphrase slightly)
    "It's obviously a duck, shoot it!" and then it turned out to be a Fish, and you say

    "I told you it was a fish, shoot it!"


    So the end result may well be the same, but I'd be disinclined to immediately trust your gut's expertise on aquatic wildlife..


  • Options
    #73
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    Ficheall wrote: »
    You said it was a duck though...


    You said (if you'll permit me to paraphrase slightly)
    "It's obviously a duck, shoot it!" and then it turned out to be a Fish, and you say

    "I told you it was a fish, shoot it!"


    So the end result may well be the same, but I'd be disinclined to immediately trust your gut's expertise on aquatic wildlife..
    For all I know he could quite easily be from Bombay and as you are probably aware a Bombay Duck is a fish!!


  • Options
    #74
    brilliantboy
    Registered Users Posts: 444 ✭✭brilliantboy


    I'm still confused as to what happened here. Was the guy 100% confirmed to be receiving assistance?
    I would hope so otherwise the decision to reverse his results and remove him from the tournament due to an allegation is questionable.

    He certainly seemed to sandbagging at least. Winning pretty much everything he entered at a canter, including the Bunratty Major 2x over (why he was allowed to enter the 2nd time around is beyond me). And if he was sandbagging by a few hundred points then the results he achieved here are somewhat more reasonable.

    So...was there a smoking gun?


  • Options
    #75
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    brilliantboy wrote: »
    I'm still confused as to what happened here. Was the guy 100% confirmed to be receiving assistance?
    I would hope so otherwise the decision to reverse his results and remove him from the tournament due to an allegation is questionable.

    He certainly seemed to sandbagging at least. Winning pretty much everything he entered at a canter, including the Bunratty Major 2x over (why he was allowed to enter the 2nd time around is beyond me). And if he was sandbagging by a few hundred points then the results he achieved here are somewhat more reasonable.

    So...was there a smoking gun?

    All his moves for the first few rounds were the same as Stockfish. He was then doing well against a GM but when the live feed to his board was stopped he suddenly became a 1500 player again and lost in a few moves. It seems pretty conclusive to me.


  • Options
    #76
    DmanDmythDledge
    Registered Users Posts: 883 ✭✭✭DmanDmythDledge


    sodacat11 wrote: »
    All his moves for the first few rounds were the same as Stockfish. He was then doing well against a GM but when the live feed to his board was stopped he suddenly became a 1500 player again and lost in a few moves. It seems pretty conclusive to me.
    Did he lose or basically throw in the towel? Think someone said he just moved his queen around a bit and then just resigned

    Also can someone PM the guy's name ðŸ™႒ - curious to see his results in other Irish tournaments


  • Options
    #77
    Tim Harding
    Closed Accounts Posts: 954 ✭✭✭Tim Harding


    sodacat11 wrote: »
    All his moves for the first few rounds were the same as Stockfish. He was then doing well against a GM but when the live feed to his board was stopped he suddenly became a 1500 player again and lost in a few moves. It seems pretty conclusive to me.

    That is a wild generalisation about Stockfish and making such uninformed comments in this public forum is really unhelpful. My opinion is that internal evidence based on analysis of his games would not stand up in a court of law.
    The ICU cannot put itself in a position where it could be sued for defamation.

    After his 9th move in the game against Ruck (who was Black) Stockfish10 evaluation immediately switches from normal minimal White edge to edge for Black. After White's anti-positional 14th move the advantage to Black increased. Ruck already had a strategically winning position (or nearly so) before the internet feed was switched off. I was observing closely in my capacity as deputy arbiter.

    Witness statements taken at the time by the Chief Arbiter about the behaviour of the player and his friends are much more convincing than analysis of the games.

    My recommendation is that moderators now close this thread at least until ICU has made some public statement on the matter.


  • Options
    #78
    brilliantboy
    Registered Users Posts: 444 ✭✭brilliantboy


    sodacat11 wrote: »
    All his moves for the first few rounds were the same as Stockfish. He was then doing well against a GM but when the live feed to his board was stopped he suddenly became a 1500 player again and lost in a few moves. It seems pretty conclusive to me.

    Now I'm even more confused. I can find the scores to the Rd.1, 3 and 5 games. Do the others exist?

    I'm no expert but I have to admit the Rd.1 game seemed fairly damning as I went through it. But one short game with a high degree of accuracy shouldn't enough to condemn someone.
    Rd.4 against the GM raises no red flags whatsoever. An innocuous opening and he steadily gets outplayed. At no point is he doing well, unless you consider lasting 20+ moves to be doing well.
    Rd.5 he plays a good game but nothing particularly suspicious about it. All standard stuff. The game score stops with him winning a pawn and is marked as a win for his opponent. I'm assuming this is when he was removed from the tournament?

    I don't want to give the impression I'm soft on cheating, in fact I'm more towards the sodacat end of the punishment spectrum; a couple of days in the stocks, 50 lashes etc. But I would prefer the level of doubt and speculation is kept to a minimum. Playing well and having a shifty friend is not evidence of cheating.


  • Options
    #79
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    I would have turned the whole thing over to the Gardai from the start, trying to obtain money by deception is fraud.


  • Options
    #80
    zeitnot
    Registered Users Posts: 265 ✭✭zeitnot


    brilliantboy wrote: »
    Now I'm even more confused. I can find the scores to the Rd.1, 3 and 5 games. Do the others exist? ...

    The ICU games collection gives the games from rounds 1, 3, 4, and 5. The game from round 2 is also available (in TWIC 1277) and will be uploaded to the ICU games collection sometime in the next few days.


  • Options
    #81
    zeitnot
    Registered Users Posts: 265 ✭✭zeitnot


    zeitnot wrote: »
    The ICU games collection gives the games from rounds 1, 3, 4, and 5. The game from round 2 is also available (in TWIC 1277) and will be uploaded to the ICU games collection sometime in the next few days.

    For those who can't wait, here is the round 2 game, with the header changed slightly:

    [pgn]
    [Event "Irish International Open 2019"]
    [Site "Dublin IRL"]
    [Date "2019.04.18"]
    [Round "2.21"]
    [White "Duck, Bombay"]
    [Black "Menzies, Colin"]
    [Result "0-1"]
    [BlackElo "2183"]
    [ECO "B08"]
    [Opening "Pirc"]
    [Variation "classical system, 5.Be2"]
    [BlackFideId "2502755"]
    [EventDate "2019.04.17"]
    [BlackNationality "IRL"]

    1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Nf3 Bg7 5. Be2 c6 6. O-O O-O 7. a4 Qc7 8. e5
    dxe5 9. Nxe5 Nd5 10. Nxd5 cxd5 11. Bf4 Qb6 12. Qd2 Nc6 13. Nxc6 bxc6 14. c3 a5
    15. Rfe1 Ra7 16. Bd3 Ba6 17. Rab1 Bxd3 18. Qxd3 Qb3 19. Ra1 Rc8 20. Re2 e6 21.
    h4 Rb7 22. h5 c5 23. dxc5 Rxc5 24. Qa6 Rc8 25. Rxe6 Qxb2 26. Rae1 Rf8 27. Re8
    Rb6 28. Qxa5 gxh5 29. Qxd5 Rf6 30. a5 Qxc3 31. Bd6 Qc2 32. Qc5 0-1
    [/pgn]


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Tim Harding
    Closed Accounts Posts: 954 ✭✭✭Tim Harding


    The round 5 game is incomplete on the ICU website because it ends when the Chief Arbiter killed the live feed.

    In round 2 several live boards malfunctioned including the one on which the suspect was playing. That was because of a wiring issue that was fixed before round 3.

    As you can see from the score that somebody posted while I was writing the first draft of this posting, Menzies was at least equal for 20 moves until he reacted badly to White's h4 thrust, and he wasn't losing until he blundered, allowing Rxe6. Nothing can be inferred from the moves of this game.

    Several other games on live boards at various times in the tournament are truncated. These games were checked by me against the scoresheets and I input the games that were not live. Some of the latter had to be truncated because of illegible or nonsensical writing by the players concerned.

    (You can imagine how much fun it is, and how long it takes, transcribing games from Russian, German, French, Dutch etc. notation, especially when time trouble starts to bite...)

    TWIC got a corrected file from me (without any notes) and the ICU also have it. What notes they choose to put at the end of the suspect's games is up to them.

    Again I request that we stop discussing what exactly the suspect is supposed to have done and how he should be dealt with.


  • Options
    #83
    brilliantboy
    Registered Users Posts: 444 ✭✭brilliantboy


    Having looked at them all I just can't see how these could be used as evidence of engine cheating. They're light years away from the 1 to 1 stockfish match they were implied to be and I sincerely hope this wasn't the rope used to hang him. The round 2 game looks like an average back and forth game with his opponent blundering a tactic. The round 3 game looks like a stock trap picked up from a book somewhere, something you would expect an experienced IM to refute but a database search shows that Mannion isn't the only victim. Not a particularly clever way to cheat if you ask me.

    His friend must have been a real shifty character :D


  • Options
    #84
    zeitnot
    Registered Users Posts: 265 ✭✭zeitnot


    Tim Harding wrote: »
    Several other games on live boards at various times in the tournament are truncated. These games were checked by me against the scoresheets and I input the games that were not live. Some of the latter had to be truncated because of illegible or nonsensical writing by the players concerned.

    Outstanding job; many thanks.
    Tim Harding wrote: »
    TWIC got a corrected file from me (without any notes) and the ICU also have it. What notes they choose to put at the end of the suspect's games is up to them.

    In case anyone is wondering based on this description, there is nothing at the end of the games in question except a bare statement of the facts as we know them.


  • Options
    #85
    forgottenhills
    Registered Users Posts: 441 ✭✭forgottenhills


    In a more general sense I don't play tournament chess but have some relatives who do, young lads around 14, 15, 16. These lads would have played several tournaments over the years and be experienced enough from that point of view to know what is normal, and what is not normal player behaviour, but would not be experienced enough to know how to deal with an opponent behaving in a way they would not have encountered before. So these lads would chat among themselves about the strange actions of an opponent after the match but not have the gumption to take any action during the match.

    If, for instance they notice that their opponent is taking numerous breaks away from the table during a match, then comes back to the table and plays a very good move very quickly after doing so, what actions should these young players take? Discuss it with the arbiter? I think that young players may not have received any guidance on what they should do in these situations. It might be useful to announce some guidelines at the start of play, for these sort of situations (apologies if this is already done). And in doing so to warn off any potential cheats.


  • Options
    #86
    Ficheall
    Registered Users Posts: 9,018 ✭✭✭Ficheall


    forgottenhills wrote: »
    If, for instance they notice that their opponent is taking numerous breaks away from the table during a match, then comes back to the table and plays a very good move very quickly after doing so, what actions should these young players take? Discuss it with the arbiter? I think that young players may not have received any guidance on what they should do in these situations. It might be useful to announce some guidelines at the start of play, for these sort of situations (apologies if this is already done). And in doing so to warn off any potential cheats.
    I don't think it would be a good thing to encourage players to start trying to think whether their opponent was cheating, what they would do to raise their suspicions with an arbiter, etc. It would distract them from their game and, more importantly, make the arbiter's life unbearable. If a player's parent/coach wishes to instill an unnecessary paranoia prior to play, so be it, but I certainly wouldn't be suggesting every player make note of their opponents' bathroom breaks, "exceptionally" good play, or how often their friends come over to look at the game.


  • Options
    #87
    cdeb
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 7,156 Mod ✭✭✭✭cdeb


    It's definitely the case that young players aren't familiar with what to do in case of controversy - not just cheating, but also other stuff such as deliberate distractions and genuine errors.

    We had one player lose a game once because after black played Bb4 takes Nc3 with check, our player tried to recapture with the pawn but his opponent said this wasn't allowed as you couldn't have two pawns on the same rank. There was no other way to capture, so our player moved his king, and soon lost, being a piece down. Both players were very new obviously, but our player simply had no idea what to do in this situation and so played on.

    The case in general is to report any issues to the arbiter at the time. I don't think this needs to be announced at the start of each round though - it's something which maybe junior clubs should let players know. Or it could be said at the start of junior events to familiarise guys with the rules.

    I saw another player at a recent tournament make an accusation of cheating against his opponent, and when the arbiter satisfied himself that nothing untoward was happening, the complainant took the hump and withdrew I think. So there's a danger in tilting the balance too much towards the mindset that cheating is taking place, which could happen if each tournament starts with a note about what to do if you suspect your opponent is cheating.


  • Options
    #88
    sodacat11
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭sodacat11


    An English player at the recent Easter Open remarked to me that he was very surprised at how much some junior players were talking to each other during games and while watching their pals.
    I can't say that I have noticed this problem myself but very often I do hear players (and not just juniors) comment to other players about their games. Things like "that's a great Knight you have on d5'' or "I see you have a nice position against so and so". They probably aren't aware that this is cheating but technically it is.


  • Options
    #89
    Tim Harding
    Closed Accounts Posts: 954 ✭✭✭Tim Harding


    sodacat11 wrote: »
    An English player at the recent Easter Open remarked to me that he was very surprised at how much some junior players were talking to each other during games and while watching their pals.
    I can't say that I have noticed this problem myself but very often I do hear players (and not just juniors) comment to other players about their games. Things like "that's a great Knight you have on d5'' or "I see you have a nice position against so and so". They probably aren't aware that this is cheating but technically it is.

    You're right. At Bunratty last year I had a junior opponent who was away from the board a lot even when his clock was running. When he hadn't come back about five minutes after I moved, I found him in the corridor chatting with pals. I did ask the arbiter to have a word with him and he stopped doing it.

    GM Florin Gheorghiu from Romania used to be notorious for this sort of thing. He knew vaguely who I was as he'd met me with IM Bob Wade. At a master tournament in England in the 1970s, I was sitting spectating (looking at demo boards, not in the playing area) when, returning from the loo, Gheorghiu came up to me and asked "How do you think I stand?"
    Naturally I didn't feel qualified to give a GM some advice...
    This is a true story.


Advertisement