FM Borislav Ivanov Disqualified

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jr0J8SPENjM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7VvvRX-nOQ&hd=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhfCUdy2Tzk&hd=1

There is an excellent chess.com article by a titled player about this player's activities. If you haven't read it, I suggest you do. There may not be proof of cheating, but there is evidence. It's to the point where some GMs refuse to play him in tournaments, and that is not good for chess.

There was no evidence. Beating your opponents really well is not evidence. It just means you don't know how to play.

A 2006 study claimed to show that Capablanca was the most accurate of all the World Champions when compared with computer analysis of World Championship match games. However, this analysis was criticized for using a second-rank chess program, Crafty, modified to limit its calculations to six moves by each side, and for favoring players whose style matched that of the program. A new 2011 computer analysis by Bratko and Guid using Rybka 2 and Rybka 3 has revealed similar results to those achieved in the 2006 Crafty analysis.

Does it mean Capablanca was cheating?

This is the key that a lot of people seem to be missing.

This is incorrect and has nothing to do with what the stated evidence is.

This guy does another analysis and has a bit balance view:

That is one of the videos I linked above.

Combined with the other 2 videos I linked, the evidence is pretty overwhelming.

Do you even know what counts as evidence? It is not your feelings or suspicions or correlation or heresay or what other people are thinking or what a bunch of GMs think. Or 5 hrs of Lilov analysis!

These are just tabloid junk.

It has be what a law court stipulates as admissable evidence, that counts as evidence, and only that. 

The fact that some GMs don't want to play with him is not EVIDENCE. The conjectures of Lilov in not EVIDENCE. 

Seriously man it is a good thing this is just chess, otherwise reasoning like that can get a man killed.

lol, carry on then.

Criminal charges arent being brought against him are they ?  If not the " evidence " needed to simply NOT allow him to play organized chess for a time, or permanently , if he persists , is not the same as the " evidence " needed for organizers to ban him from playing .  I think FIDE  ( and other organizations )  need to catch up with the times and deal with the problem and be very severe when a cheater is caught . 

That is some logic! lol

You cannot redefine evidence so that it works for your agenda. 

That applies in a court of law, and only there.

Statistical analysis and expert testimony are forms of evidence.  I'm no lawyer, but for what it's worth I think you would have a case against him in a court of law.

Even so, this is not a court of law.  His country's federation is just banning him for a few months.  If Ivanov finds this so unjust let him take the federation to court himself.

The law applies to the land. 

Anyway, perhaps, I failed to make it clear. If for instance you have a dark spot on your skin, and you ask ten friends of yours,"Does this look malignant?", and they all reply in unison (perhaps out of malice) "Yes!".

Your suspicions and your companions rejoinders don't count as evidence. That is, you cannot take a sharp knife, and some rubbing alcohol and start removing the growth; or ask a surgically trained friend to do it.

You will have to get expert opinion as to what counts as evidence of a malanoma.

So, if Ivanov decides to sue, and they don't have any proof how he did it, anything on his person, it is just accusations.

So you have to get a law courts official opinion as to what counts as admissable evidence, if they say, "Yes, his play is too much like houdini and what everyone is saying is sufficient." Then I would agree and say yes they have the right to ban him.

Because it was the decision of people who couldn't be swayed or influenced in any way. Unbiased that is.

You can't willy nilly ban people just because a horde of GMs start threatening walkouts, and say they won't play with that boy. The organisers are getting hijacked and their decision is not unbiased. It has been influenced by their vested interest in keeping the majority happy. 

They are just doing it because of the pressure the older boys are putting on the 'mummy and daddy' of the federation.

This is not a matter of "the law of the land." It is the law of a Bulgarian Chess organization. 

That is what is being discussed!!! lol Whether they acted rightly or not! Did they have sufficient evidence? Was it unbiased? etc etc

OF course it is a matter of Bul(ly)garian Chess Organisation, that doesn't mean they are not beyond reproach.

Ivanov was banned by the Bulgarian Chess Federation for unspecificed unsporting behavior, not for cheating.

If he is found guilty of cheating by FIDE, he is likely to receive a lifetime ban.

And not only preform 400 ELO above their rating.  But subsequently alternate between their super-human (as defined by Houdini match-up) and their standard performances.

There is an easy way to find out.

If the Bulgarian's federation made an unfair and unlawful decision, Ivanov will sue them and win. Otherwise, he will just shut the hell up for four months and then come back stealing money prize from second-class tournaments until his next ban.

My bet is on the second option.