Is Ivanov a cheater?

This week I read about this new case of cheating in a tournament played in the Croatian city of Zara.

Ivanov, a 26 year old who didn't show in all his chess life genius status, like we have seen in Carlsen, Kasparov, Fischer, etc. Began to crush GM after GM, and strangely only when the broadcast of the round before last game was suspended, Ivanov lost. (yeah, maybe there is a connection!)

Same tournament in 2011, Ivanov played against 1900/2000 rated players, and didn't have a superlative result, since he lost and drew to such lot.

Now, some speak of proof beyond reasonable doubt, but it is evidently people who have interest in justifying cheaters, since unfortunately in chess thousand of hours studying are needed to become a GM, and one doesn't become a GM overnight.

Many also made the mistake of thinking, that Ivanov result could justify 3-400 elo leap. But that is not the case, since in order to beat GM after GM within 35 moves, one need to be above 3000, not a mere 2500-2600.

I do believe FIDE, in order to safeguard chess as a sport, needs to take some drastic measures.

An example could be to let this cheater play, in an isolated setting, 10 games, against one or more GMs, and see what the result is. Because if the result is 0, then we need to refer to the police, or other authorities for evident criminal conduct.

Of course, those who cheat, and want to justify cheaters, will invent more excuses, but they are just pathetic, since we all know the truth.

Again, I publish the winning percentages table, which can let anyone make an experiment at home, they can play against a computer, and see how many times they win.

I'd like also to note that in some sites, playing poker, they have developed programs to detect cheaters, so it shouldn't be difficult to do the same for chess.

H:  % of games expected to be won by the higher rated player
L:  % of games expected to be won by the lower rated player

I believe he was saying his Rating would need to be that high to be consistantly beating GMs in under 26 moves, not that it was 3000

He beat 4 GMs if you bother to read multiple sources on the matter.

Yeah, because that's what the police should be concerning themselves with: cheating at a boardgame. lol

Maybe it's time for chess to police itself:

A damp cell in Eastern Europe, lit by an unshaded tungsten filament bulb, fingernails and bodily fluids decorate the concrete walls.

You wake to discover yourself chained to a chair. Across a steel table sits the spitting image of Joe Stalin.

Joe: "Name, rating and tournament number!"

You: "W what? who are you?"

Joe: "You are currently a guest of the Chesstapo, until such a time as we believe that we have the truth"

You: "You're crazy man!"

A chess board whacks you round the head, your head spins, your eyes blur, your ears ring.

Joe: "NAME! RATING! TOURNAMENT NUMBER!"

You see Joe pick up a large wooden, soviet-made chess clock and wonder where he's going to fit it.

You: "Okay! okay! this is what happened....."

+ You have to think about splinters.

There are rules for fairy tales now?

Moscow clock:

"Made by the Moscow clock Company No.2 (and the Jantar factory as well), these huge and very silent clocks were the tournament standard in the USSR from the 30's till the 60's. Typical features of these Soviet clocks are the action stoppers in the middle, long button action, and massive clockworks. These clocks have forerunners in old German chessclocks they might be copied from."

http://www.chess-museum.com/the-chess-clock-cabinet-i.html

also:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/VINTAGE-Russian-Soviet-USSR-WOODEN-CHESS-Clock-work-/390116500990

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Soviet-Chess-Clock-Watch-Moscow-MChZ-2-Very-Rare-wooden-case-Ussr-/110995638126?pt=Games_US hash=item19d7db076e

p.s.

fissionfowl wrote:

paladino2012 wrote:

An example could be to let this cheater play, in an isolated setting, 10 games, against one or more GMs, and see what the result is. Because if the result is 0, then we need to refer to the police, or other authorities for evident criminal conduct.

Yeah, because that's what the police should be concerning themselves with: cheating at a boardgame. lol

At the top level there is a huge amount of money to be made from chess and, if he was cheating, it is nothing short of theft. If the participants pay thousands of £/$ to enter and someone cheats their way to a win it is stealing. Why shouldn't the police get involved at that level if cheating is proven? They would if you used technology to steal from a casino.

Call me a fool. Call me an idiot. Call me gullible.

But in a post-internet world with endless videos, e-books and coaching, leaps of performance are possible without cheating. Maybe he was always at this level and some personal issue [health, travel to chess events, work hours] hindered his chess abilities. None of us know Ivanov personally, I assume, so how can anyone reach a conclusion of cheating? I can't.

It is sad that cheating has come into chess. I believe the will exists to combat it - the efforts made on this site being an example.

Cycling suffered from widespread cheating and recovered; to a certain extent athletics also.  Let us hope chess can find effective ways to combat the cheats.

I guess you have a point.

"Began to crush GM after GM, and strangely only when the broadcast of the round before last game was suspended, Ivanov lost. (yeah, maybe there is a connection!)"

That was not his only loss. And he won against a GM, when the broadcast was off as well.

If someone is really interested in that case, maybe he could post his games here and analyze them with some standard engines. Actually i think things might get obvious even by analyzing them with 1 engine.

The games have been posted here:

http://www.chess.com/news/suspected-cheater-strip-searched-4830

One of the main problem is that there is no standard. Different Tournaments do things differently...and some of the rules concerning suspected cheaters are vague at best in how to proceed. Cheating in chess even at the pro level has been going on for some time now...this incident is not an isolated one, yet FIDE does not seem serious about doing anything positive.

Concerning this case in particular, a player who clearly is playing above his stregth will always be suspected. Because the games are live, and engines can find the best move in seconds...the only problem for cheaters is "how to convey the message"...and there are also many ways to solve this problem especially when the general public is within eyeview.

New Cheating devices are made  everyday and more sophisticated ones to come yet.

Look at his games, compare to engine.. simple really.

The thing is he is a 2200, so if he plays like a computer, then hes a cheater.

Well, it would be a sad day on one hand, but on the other, perhaps all players and anyone within speaking distance of the players, should have to go through a metal detector and an airport  xray machine...

I have considered everything from surgically implanted devices near the inner ear, or even a device that produces an impulse that can be felt. Another person could analyze the games in real time and send the coordinates by morse code. They could even use multiple engines and make it hard to detect.

I certainly advocate the use of every engine above the player's elo, to figure out which one is giving the best match rate. If it is high enough, as compared with best known play, by more than 5 to 10 %, in an entire tournament, I would then test the player, by making them play Houdini or Deep Fritz, or both, just to see how they play. If they are able to maintain the same level of play, after all of this, I'd vindicate them. I would also make these games with the engines take place in total privacy and in an area where cell phone/ computer network signals can't operate. This would help rule out some sort of secretly engineered device. If the level of play falls off signifcantly, label them a cheat and ban them...

I realize all of this is easier said than done, but unfortunately, the technology is only going to make this sort of scifi fantasy more available...what choice do we have? Shall we let otb chess become like online gaming?

I advocated the same idea in my post above...it is very feasible and technology like it will become more prevalent...

Uhohspaghettio, you are the one slinging bold-face accusations such as "You made that up in your head." and telling people to get their facts straight.  Now you're telling people to relax?  You just got caught out as a hyperventilating blowhard, I think you should be apologizing.

I analysed 5 of his games(rounds 1 2 3 5 6) off this tournament with Houdini 2.0, and he played at a higher level than Carlsen.   His game of round 5 was the most striking because from move 7 until the very end. Each move he played was the top move according to my Houdini. 100% the First line, top move. (I set my houdini on 4 lines) And in the other games there were a few moves where he took the 2nd or 3rd line but never move than 0.10 difference with the top line(different engine/hardware presumably).

The absolute best top GM's NEVER play like this. They sometimes play the top line, often also the second or third line, and also always a few moves that are (a lot) more than 0.10 difference with the top line (they are human).

Because he was accused before, I also took a look on his Fide profile to a game from his on the Bulgarian Student championship, where he also scored very high suddenly. I took the game from the last round against a 2400 IM, and here also only a few moves that were not the top line, but like the 2nd or third line with less than 0.10 difference.

In round 2, the game he lost, with the very long endgame, he also follows houdini for big streches of moves.

Everything combined, there is just no way he didn't had engine assistance.

By the way, some high tec sci fi is not necessary for this. He could have a friend in the audience to give him simple signals, like tapping his left hand  to signal the files, his right hand to signal ranks. tap 3 times left hand would be c file, 5 times right hand 5th rank so c5 would be the move, and to signal pieces they could use tappings of both hands at the same time for example. Or assigning pieces to the fingers and just show a finger. This would be totally discreet and unnotticable way to do it.