FM Borislav Ivanov Disqualified - Chess Forums - Page 38

KingKonan · 2013-05-22T16:44:47-07:00

For anyone who has been following the 'meteoric rise' of the suspected cheater Ivanov, it was announced earlier he has been suspended by the Bulgarian Chess Fed for four months. http://chess-news.ru/en/node/12151

Magnetic_Attitude

Jun 9, 2013

0

#741

michaelingram wrote:

He played better on the day, that doesn't mean anything outside of him playing better. If he said he played better, he certainly doesn't seem to be lying.

Lol, he claims to be able to beat an 3300 Elo engine 10 out of 10 times. After peaking at FM strength before. You're right, he isn't lying. How could he?

DrCheckevertim

Jun 9, 2013

0

#742

Magnetic_Attitude wrote:

michaelingram wrote:

He played better on the day, that doesn't mean anything outside of him playing better. If he said he played better, he certainly doesn't seem to be lying.

Lol, he claims to be able to beat an 3300 Elo engine 10 out of 10 times. After peaking at FM strength before. You're right, he isn't lying. How could he?

To beat a 3300 ELO engine 10/10 times, I believe that would put you somewhere around 4000 ELO. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong. (I'm close, at least)

VLaurenT

Jun 9, 2013

0

#743

Bring your friend in.

If he is a mathematician, he will understand

schlechter55

Jun 9, 2013

0

#744

The discussion is really going backward now. I refuted some pages ago the argument that he could have learned certain lines (which then indeed would come up in the games, as he expected).

I do not repeat myself.

Btw, I am a Mathematican with PhD.

goldendog

Jun 9, 2013

0

#745

schlechter55 wrote:

The discussion is really going backward now.

In a sense, yes. New troll is the old troll, again, I think.

-waller-

Jun 9, 2013

0

#746

I'm a mathematician as well, but I think what makes it so obvious to me that he's cheating is the fact that I understand (to a certain degree) how strong chess players play, and how a chess engine plays. It's just nonsense to claim that he "thinks like a computer". Computers don't think, they use brute force calculation.

As for the "probable lines" scenario, I'm sure schlechter's argument was good enough, and I myself just find it complete nonsense. Sorry, but that's how I find it!

schlechter55

Jun 9, 2013

0

#747

goldendog wrote:

schlechter55 wrote:

The discussion is really going backward now.

In a sense, yes. New troll is the old troll, again, I think.

Whom do you mean ?

goldendog

Jun 9, 2013

0

#748

schlechter55 wrote:

goldendog wrote:

schlechter55 wrote:

The discussion is really going backward now.

In a sense, yes. New troll is the old troll, again, I think.

Whom do you mean ?

Same banned guy sneaks back in with stupid arguments.

schlechter55

Jun 9, 2013

0

#749

who was banned ?

netzach

Jun 9, 2013

0

#750

Quite a few at start of 2013? :)

goldendog

Jun 9, 2013

0

#751

Valek=Zyloth and now michaelingram--all ban-hammered. Same guy, same troll.

LegoPirateSenior

Jun 9, 2013

0

#752

michaelingram wrote:

As I seem to be aware of delusional, not if you know the computers next moves [...].

There. Fixed it for you.

You probably are not aware of the fact that contemporary engines do not always play the same move in the same position, even if the same engine is run on the same computer, with identical settings.

motarlan

Jun 9, 2013

0

#753

[COMMENT DELETED]

LegoPirateSenior

Jun 9, 2013

0

#754

[COMMENT DELETED]

schlechter55

Jun 9, 2013

0

#755

One must stop a discussion when the other side is just doing a monologue, and without paying attention to the criticism or even refutation by you.

schlechter55

Jun 9, 2013

0

#756

However, we are taught evrey day by politicians that such a 'strategy' can pay off, especially when the third party (the listeners) are not following the arguments but only whether or not he/she looks pretty, gets angry, etc.

Ubik42

Jun 9, 2013

0

#757

So, Ivanov wasn't cheating?

schlechter55

Jun 9, 2013

0

#758

you cannot make me angry.

Irontiger

Jun 10, 2013

0

#759

schlechter55 wrote:

However, we are taught evrey day by politicians that such a 'strategy' can pay off, especially when the third party (the listeners) are not following the arguments but only whether or not he/she looks pretty, gets angry, etc.

So true.

Let me try.

michaelingram wrote:

So many statisticians today get it wrong. I read a book called Lies and Statistics how the government used modern statistical methods but actually get these statistics wrong because they miss out vital evidence.

Those who have shown these statistics here will normally miss out vital information... like the argument that these statistics can be put on equal on par with how we evaluate DNA. Well that's just false.

Later on :

michaelingram wrote:

My friend has a degree in mathematics (....)

Sounds a bad try at authority argument to avoid using the brains.

Oh, sorry, that won't work, so :

HOW STUPID ARE YOU YOU TROLL ! YOU WILL MAKE CHILDREN DIE FROM READING YOUR CRAP !

Was that convincing ?

I predict that next he will attack the form and not the argument.

red-lady

Jun 10, 2013

0

#760

Irontiger wrote:

schlechter55 wrote:

However, we are taught evrey day by politicians that such a 'strategy' can pay off, especially when the third party (the listeners) are not following the arguments but only whether or not he/she looks pretty, gets angry, etc.

So true.

Let me try.

michaelingram wrote:

So many statisticians today get it wrong. I read a book called Lies and Statistics how the government used modern statistical methods but actually get these statistics wrong because they miss out vital evidence.

Those who have shown these statistics here will normally miss out vital information... like the argument that these statistics can be put on equal on par with how we evaluate DNA. Well that's just false.

Later on :

michaelingram wrote:

My friend has a degree in mathematics (....)

Sounds a bad try at authority argument to avoid using the brains.

Oh, sorry, that won't work, so :

HOW STUPID ARE YOU YOU TROLL ! YOU WILL MAKE CHILDREN DIE FROM READING YOUR CRAP !

Was that convincing ?

I predict that next he will attack the form and not the argument.

Ssst It's not worth it...