Chess 960: The Soulution to Electronic Cheating?

no but seriously Fischer chess they should introduce anyway. its still fun now and then

Thank you for your post, indeed that was the story I was refering to, there was however another story where some 12 year old was also busted.

As to chess engines not being able able to play Chess 960. I will concede to the points  made, HOWEVER in their current form they are set up for standard chess. While -- I'm sure -- some will debate this point, most chess engines are designed to obtain the advantage during the  opening, with and mutiplier effect in the  middle or endgames, where such engines shine. I could be WRONG. Maybe Houdini, et al can be set up to play Chess 960,  but given the fact that there are so many potential starting positions in Chess 960, and being  forced to  reset the computer lineup for each and every game as opposed to the current "default" system, where you can program a library of  openings the computer can  call upon,  makes -- or should make  -- Chess 960 a tougher nut to crack. It does meant it can't. I  *think*  it  was Fischer  -- could be  WRONG -- that found that  in Chess 960 the distribution  of wins, draws, losses comes out to something 25% Wins, 50% Draws,  and  25% Losses, between two roughly equal opponants.   Whereas Fischer dominated Spassky, in Classical Chess, the results playing Chess  960  aka  Fischer Random Chess was more what would be  predicted. In the future could chess engines be programed to  play the crushing chess they now can?? The answer is without a doubt,  YES. It should also be quite  obvious if someone is *thinking* of using an electronic device since it takes time to set the bloody thing  up, unlike now where there is  default  setup. In the current default mode the computer has all the advantage  right from move one since  it has every opening pre-programed with  every line and sub-line it can draw upon; in Chess 960 you take away that advantage. Or to put it another way, with the current crop of chess engines, you  might as well resign after the 1st move -- you're already toast. That was my point.

Moving on... OK let's agree it does NOT matter if you play "Classical Chess" or "Chess 960" electronic cheating is still going to take place. How are we going to deal with it?!? I also  agree  with the posters who say that ALL electronic devices including MonRoi and eNotate should be  banned from  the tournament and only a paper scoresheet and pen or pencil allowed. Lety it be noted however that eNotate seems to have been approved and blessed by the USCF:

" .... Sevan Muradian, the designer and primary vendor of    the eNotate software, asserts no hacking took place. The USCF rulebook specifically states that to gain tournament certification, vendors of electronic score sheets must PROVE that anybody using the score sheet "CANNOT access a chess engine or any stored games, openings, or analysis contained within the electronics of the device." And, say USCF officials, eNotate PASSED MUSTER. Muradian remains convinced it's hack-proof."

Other notes:

Irina Lymar who  is  a WGM and a Lawyer in Russia in an interview  with  Oleg Korneev http://www.chessbase.com/Home/TabId/211/PostId/4010353/irina-lymar-fide-must-develop-anti-cheating-rules-030713.aspx suggested that all  players enetering a playing hall pass through a metal detector. But someone -- can't remember who -- stated such devices are not strong enough to detect all metal  or electronic devices and ONLY "electronic wanding" would be sensitive enough to detect such  devices, which is  something I advocate. Do I think electronic jaming should be  used?!? Unless someone could PROVE that it would not interfer with things such as heart pacemakers and such devices and was SAFE, that would NOT be the way to go.

Which brings  up a -- for the time being at least -- final point: How are we going to deal with those who are DISABLED?!? These are some examples of people who could be accused of "electronic cheating": The profoundly DEAF who have cochlear implants; people with PARKINSON'S DISEASE who  have  bilateral deep brain stimulation system, part of which  includes two platinum iridium electrodes sunk deep into the brain; people with HEART PROBLEMS and rely upon pacemakers; people who  LOST AN EYE which was replaced with a glass eyes; the AMPUTEE who has a prosthetic limb; even people who are  NOT classically defined as disabled, but who use and rely upon something as unbiquitous as reading glasses?!? The person with a cochlear implant which allows the person to hear and is surgically implanted: what is to stop some idiot from proclaiming s/he is receiving moves from  someone outside; likewise the Parkinson's patient with deep brain stimulation is receiving information via their elecrtodes; the person with the heart pacemaker, accused of receiving  "morse code"; the person with the glass eye, accused of sending and receiving signals by a miniture camera; the amputee  accused of hiding electronics within their prosthetic; even people who have  glasses, accused of having one way  monitors.  How  are we going to deal with the disabled population?? Quoting WGM Lymar there should be no arbitrariness, and the rules should apply uniformally -- such as passing through a metal detector or being electronically wanded. If in our zeal to curb electronic cheating we single out a group or sub-group of of persons -- such as the diabled who depend on "electronic devices" for medical reasons and accuse them  of "electronic cheating" you could open up yourself to massive lawsuits. 

One final question: Do we need a more exact definition  of what "cheating" is? Please don't  pounce yet. I ask this for a very  specific  reason: There is some obsure rule that if you record some move on your score sheet then you are REQUIRED to make that move, even  if you have NOT touched any piece. Example: I am *thinking* that Nxe4 is a good move, so I make a note on my  scoresheet -- mind you I have NOT touched the piece. I then continue my analysis an decide that Qxh6+ would be an even  stronger move. A long, long, time ago  in a galaxy  far, far away this would have been perfectly acceptable. I was simply using my  score sheet as a placeholder for several alternative  moves. I had neither touched any of my pieces or any of my opponents pieces. Under the "NEW RULE" (NEW to me) I woud be obligated to play Nxe4 because I wrote it on  my score sheet. Qxh6+ would be disallowed under the provision that I'm not permitted to refer to "notes". Some TDs enforce this provision strictly, other not at all. Is writing  a possible move on your score sheet then changing your mind to make another move the same thing as "referring to notes"??? Is it the same thing as walking into the tournament hall with say my opening written down that I then refer to, the same thing as notating a move on my score sheet, changing my mind erasing my first move and then making an alternate move?!? Have I cheated?!? Given that at no time did I violate the touch-move rule, nor did I refer pre-packaged notes ( which is what I  *think* was the inital *intent* of the rule ) do we need to be more specific of what  constitiutes "refering to notes"?!?     

With the possible of online cheating, electronic cheating has not become a huge  problem...  YET. We need to become proactive in dealing with this growing problem, not reactive. We also need to realize that no  matter what rules we make we will not  catch  every person, but rather to strive to catch  95%+ of all cheraters. If you think you are going to  catch 100% of the cheaters out there you are deluding yourself. We also need to take  steps that  yopu   can't  simply "accuse" someone of cheating unless you have substantial grounds for making such an accusation. IF we are going to have sever penalties fo someone who  knowingly and willfully cheats, then  by the same token we must have equally sever penalties foer someone who  accuses  another player who is PROVEN INNOCENT --  the knife MUST cut both ways, or the whole system will decend into chaos, and make a mockery of having  "rules"

COOL!! Just a few points:

1. It *sounds* as though this is some type of X-ray  device. You do  know that players who play frequently are going to object to  being  X-rayed  every time  they play  in a tournament.

2. It *sounds*  as  though  this  would be  EXPENSIVE. I  know for instance that I  a surgical steel screw in my right shoulder, On that screw is a ID  number. If  I were to die in some disaster and there was nothing left  of  me, the  forensic  scientists would still be able to  ID  me based on finding that screw. Are there any electronic wands out there akin  to microchip readers that read microchips we inject into our  dogs and  cats that might be able to do the  same things for reading human implanted electronic devices, and medical implants  such  as screws (you just KNOW that if you  get  wanded that it shows something metalic inside you someonwe with accuse you of cheating at some point)?   

3. Whatever system we hypothetically come  up with  should be cost efficient, easily portable, and sensitive . At this  point electronic wanding is the best match. While using a "metal detector " as WGM Lymar has suggested  may   be  able to "process" a large number of people in a short period of time versus hand "wanding", metal detectors are  LARGE, bulky, expensive,  and not very sensitive. You could probably buy 3-4 wands for the same amount that one metal detector would cost. Or should both be used???    

That's why I listed this in my original post.

"2-No non players/directors in the tournament room"

I think that one has to happen no matter what as low tech cheating is too easy to do. Having a viewing room with CCTV monitors showing the games so guests can watch should be doable in many circumstances.

Or even electronic boards... If you can afford cameras and a staff to input the camera into a proper display screen, you can afford the magical boards.

Of course, but at least here in the U.S. many tournaments don't even supply cheap silicon boards for play so didn't want to aim too high.

Let's make it happen!

Exactly my point : the "bring your own board" tournaments are condemned to loose security anyways by the budget constraints. No cameras, no two rooms for players/audience, etc.

Jamming signals might not be necessary. Currently some stores are using technology to be able to track individual wifi signals. They supposedly use this to improve marketing by tracking people's movements within their stores. 

OK a lot of good suggestions are being made. I  strongly support the idea that NO electronic devices be permitted in the playing hall, this includes outlawing the use of Electronic Scoresheets, including MonRoi and eNotate. Both the USCF and FIDE *currently* allow the use of electronic scoresheets. Indeed the USCF derives some revenue from the sale of MonRoi devices:

"...According to a January 26th USCF memo from Mr. Hall, in exchange for an official USCF endorsement, MonRoi agreed to a revenue sharing arrangement with the USCF amounting to 1% of all U.S. revenues for the Monroi product line, plus an initial advertising commitment.

"It was not immediately recognized that a rules issue would arise as a result of the endorsement. Rules Committee member, Tim Just explains, “the USCF made the Monroi "official" equipment before they contacted the Committee. The Committee chair, [David Kuhns,] revised the rules to address the concerns brought about by this device. The members reviewed the changes. We, as a committee, had no plans to change any of those rules for any other reason.”

"Kuhns notes that FIDE changed its rules following, “numerous complaints of players recording a move, crossing it off, recording a second move, crossing it off, etc.” The USCF rule change, however, is not directed at curbing this, more questionable, behavior, nor has such behavior been epidemic in USCF events, according to any organizer contacted by Chess Life."

Here is USCF Rule 15A and 20C.:

" 15A. (Variation I) Paper scoresheet variation.
The player using a paper scoresheet may first make the move, and then write it on the scoresheet, or vice versa. This variation does not need to be advertised in advance. The scoresheet shall be visible to the arbiter (tournament directors) and the opponent throughout the game.

TD TIP: TDs may penalize a player that is in violation of 20C. "Use of notes prohibited" if the player is first writing the move and repeatedly altering that move on their scoresheet before completing a move on the board.

20C. Use of notes prohibited. The use of notes made during the game as an aid to memory is forbidden, aside from the actual recording of the moves, draw offers, and clock times, and the header information normally found on a scoresheet. This is a much less serious offense than 20B; a warning or minor time penalty is common, with more severe punishment if the offense is repeated. See also 1C2, Director discretion; 15. The Recording of Games; and 21K,
Use of director's power."

As we saw with the eNotate  http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8362701/the-evolution-cheating-chess we were told the device could NOT be hacked,  but apparently was. We can only assume that at some point the MonRoi device will  be hacked. 

Assuming both the USCF (which derives $$ from the sale of MonRoi devices) and FIDE can be pursuaded to outlaw the USE of ALL electronic scoresheets and if we return to paper and pen/pencil scotesheets (doubtful as the electronic genie is out of the bottle), should we relax USCF rule 20C?? Should writing a move on a scoresheet crossing it off, recording another move, etc. be deemed "cheating"? Do  both the USCF and FIDE need written "Rules" both  to define what cheating is (the old saw that "I know cheating when I see it", is not good enough), and do  we need codify not allowing spectators into the playing  hall??

An important point is the overuse of the term hacking. It is most likely that the kid simply turned off enotate and then turned on his engine, no hacking required.

Curious, what is the reasoning behind not allowing notes on moves you've made? I always thought that would be a good way to look back at your games after the tournament and fix problems in your thought process.

If I understand well what I have read in the forums about the Monroi, it is not just a software, it is a whole electronic device. You cannot install other programs on the hardware easily, doing so (pre-game) could be called hacking.

He was referring to the story of eNotate abuse which runs on a regular tablet and saying that was a story of the software being hacked, but in that case it was most likely simply the kid turning off eNotate to turn on his engine. So I was pointing out that it was more than likely not any hacking at all and people generally throw that word around too freely.

Then he said due to that it was only a matter of time for the Monroi to be hacked.

The easiest way to abuse that would probably be to gut it and put a tablet/smartphone inside so it looked normal from the outside and put a program on that which mimiced the look of the Monroi UI for showing officials to get approved use. Hacking would probably be the longest and hardest approach to cheating with it.

As I understood it, you could not simply "turn off" eNotate and "turn on" an engine, as what ever he had was capable of recording the moves, and printing them out. If that were the case the USCF would not have bestowed its eternal blessings on eNotate. Also you would have thought that someone along the way would have thought about this elementary way to cheat. Banning ALL electronic devices --  including MonRoi and eNotate and other "electronic scoresheets" -- and going  back to  paper and pen/pencil is the only sure way to plug the easiest way to electronically cheat. Get rid of them and electronic wanding should pick up  -- my guess -- 99.99% of all other electronic devices.

BTW does anyone know if there is an on-line version of -- I want to say the 5th Edition -- of the USCF's "Rules of Chess"?? I found one for FIDE but not one for the USCF. All I found was a reference where to purchase a copy. And something tells me its not even up to date, as the USCF keeps amending its "Rules". 

eNotate is simply a program running on a device of your choice.  You can always shut down a program and start another. There is nothing magical about it at all. Even if the program hardcoded to say you couldn't turn off the program until you printed out the final score sheet, you could simply turn the whole device off and back on.

You can see eNotate's site and see which devices it works on. It runs on, and is approved on, devices like this http://www.amazon.com/Dell-Axim-X50-Entry-Level-Bluetooth/dp/B0009YXD1U which are simply handheld computers that run programs such as this and engines.

No clandestine hacking is needed to do what that kid did. Anyone on earth could do it.

I'm sure people thought of it. But when you say we will share profits with uschess if you approve this program to be used, decisions start to be compromised.

The answer goes to the ban of using "Notes". Rule 20C. Do I think it a stupid rule? Yes, for the very reason you point out. I can  see banning pre-packaged, if you will, "notes" that you bring into tournament hall with you, but I can't see a reason why you can't make notes on your scoresheet that shows your thinking  process during the game. Alas, doing so, according to  both  the USCF and FIDE, violates the rule refering to the  use of  "notes". That is also another strike against  using  electronic scoresheets, as it gives a player a birdseye view of the chess board that helps them to visualize any combinations, etc. that they might make on the board, that you don't have if you are using  ONLY paper and pen/pencil. Indeed I read that a player is using an electronic scoresheet has a distinct advantage for that very reason, over an opponent recording his/her moves using traditional paper and pen/pencil. IF we are going to  stuck with the use of electronic scoresheets,  the  player who uses traditional paper and pen/pencil should be allowed to  notate their thinking processes on the scoresheet to off set the inherent advantages one gains from using an electronic scoresheet, with its graphical depiction of the chess board. Recording your thinking  process should not be referred to using "Notes". 

Thanks for the  reference. Will look it up. But *IF* The Powers That Be actually knew about this weak link and the possibility that it could be exploited to cheat, then The Powers That Be have to be held accountable if cheating does take place. I can not agree more heartedly with  your conclusion -- you hit the nail on the head. If we are willing to wink-and-nod to bring in money, why are we so shocked that someone actually exploits it?!?

Thank God my tournament days are long behind me. It's the same game I grew up with, but it has changed in so many  ways.....

I agree that Fischer Random chess should become the new chess, it would restrict cheating in that it would be more difficult to set up a position on a concealed device since the initial starting position would be different in each game. Also the game would benefit because people would not be able to memorize opening moves and thus they would have to actually play chess from the start. The only alternative to this would be to have players in the room take off all of their clothes.     

There are times when I'm trying to calculate a long sequence, typically in a K+P ending which involves both Kings racing over to the other side of the board, when I'd like to note the position after several moves - e.g. to remember that White King is on g6, Black King on e5, and it's White to move. This would make it easier to calculate the rest of the sequence from there, since I wouldn't have to keep going back to current position each time.

I suspect this is why note taking is not allowed.

Why it's sometimes allowable to have an electronic device just to record your moves is beyond me.

So the answer to cheating in chess is to not play chess anymore?

Hmm, I admire your willingness to stamp out cheating but I'm not sure I agree with your approach.