warrior689 wrote:
Ubik lol, 100$ is nothing for him, and a lot of chess.com members either.
Ah, warrior689 admits that he could afford a camera! I will be keeping a close eye on you during the next FIDE tournament!
FM Borislav Ivanov Disqualified
Sort:
It's clear from the statistical analysis that he does -- the how is incidental at this point.
FlintLockwood wrote:
(blah blah blah more than 5s)
Even if you were convincing, you would have proven that in some games (the rapid time controls), he must play some moves without the computer.
This does not refute, at all, the fact that in many other games, he had the possibility to cheat, and we are almost sure he did, and the fact that he could very well ask for Houdini only in critical positions, ie in 1/5 of the moves.
FlintLockwood wrote:
Irontiger wrote:
FlintLockwood wrote:
(blah blah blah more than 5s)
Even if you were convincing, you would have proven that in some games (the rapid time controls), he must play some moves without the computer.
This does not refute, at all, the fact that in many other games, he had the possibility to cheat, and we are almost sure he did, and the fact that he could very well ask for Houdini only in critical positions, ie in 1/5 of the moves.
even if he had the possibility to cheat in the longer games I am specifically referring to the short games. Your obnoxious and attacking remarks are get a bit tired now.
Lol.
FlintLockwood wrote:
TheGrobe wrote:
It's clear from the statistical analysis that he does -- the how is incidental at this point.
the 'how' is very relevant in the short games ,if he hasn't got time to cheat he is not cheating
Yet he so clearly is....
Jun 11, 2013
0
#808
FlintLockwood wrote:
Firebrand X: At any rate, your reply indicates you weren't actually asking an objective question. It seems instead you've already made up your mind he isn't cheating, and are blowing off perfectly logical explanations.
I am asking a reasonable question. If he has to operate some device with his toes or tongue then clearly he is going to take more than 5 seconds to do that ,get a reply and make a move.Ever tried sending code with your toes in less than five second?
The idea of a tiny camera is just absurd ,he is in full view ,sitting across the table from a guy and tiny cameras are simply not that tiny to stay unobserved especially if everybody is watching you like a hawk.
If his buddy is sending him the answers it will still have to be in the form of some morse-code which will still take longer than 5 seconds.
If you are saying he had a tiny camera,tiny earpiece and a pocket GM that helped him and it stayed unobserved then I am afraid someone at these tournaments need glasses and badly so.
He may use a bean-like small tone beeper in ear canal. Nobody hears only him. Imagine: 1 octave range, 4 tones short melody gives him complete info about actual piece location and recommended move. Little training and let's go cheat. Sending moves from the chess engine doesn't even need accomplice's work, little script is sufficient.
Cameras are small enough these days that they can be made completely undetectable.
Radio earpieces are small enough these days that they can be made completely undetectable.
The only circumstantial evidence against Borislav is that his performance is beyond what his elo rating would predict. Given the recent scrutiny, even the radio scans at Villava Rapid, the guy must have the entire CIA infrastructure behind him... they found no evidence of devices, they delayed live streaming, plus it was a 10min rapid, they even had a 1 way mirror.... maybe the guy has just learnt a way to replicate chess software OTB... you can't disqualify the guy on an unproven suspicion...
Marcokim wrote:
maybe the guy has just learnt a way to replicate chess software OTB...
It seems a common misperception that this is even possible, and shows a lack of understanding of computer vs. human chess capabilities and stylistic leanings.
Jun 11, 2013
0
#812
Polar_Bear wrote:
He may use a bean-like small tone beeper in ear canal. Nobody hears only him. Imagine: 1 octave range, 4 tones short melody gives him complete info about actual piece location and recommended move.
He may use a bean-like small tone beeper in ear canal. Nobody hears only him. Imagine: 1 octave range, 4 tones short melody gives him complete info about actual piece location and recommended move.
That's a fairly elegant system of encoding, and would work very well for anyone with a little bit of a musical background. Practice for a week, and it would become completely second-nature.
I'm getting opportunities to buy a bridge from a Bulgarian prince in my email inbox.
I'm really tempted.
Jun 11, 2013
0
#814
JamieKowalski wrote:
Polar_Bear wrote:
He may use a bean-like small tone beeper in ear canal. Nobody hears only him. Imagine: 1 octave range, 4 tones short melody gives him complete info about actual piece location and recommended move.
He may use a bean-like small tone beeper in ear canal. Nobody hears only him. Imagine: 1 octave range, 4 tones short melody gives him complete info about actual piece location and recommended move.
That's a fairly elegant system of encoding, and would work very well for anyone with a little bit of a musical background. Practice for a week, and it would become completely second-nature.
Quite clever, actually. Could be done with three tones instead of four if you were to use a chromatic scale.
Polar_Bear wrote:
I have found this:
http://funcfash.com/2009/10/invisible-bluetooth-spy-2-way-radio/
Similarily, this is a camera:
FlintLockwood wrote:
Irontiger: It must be the French humor but then again you really represent the average anti-Ivanov groupie which is so overly eager to sound clever and informed but at the same time only prove what you really are.No wonder you are at each other's throats.
I have asked before why you call yourself irontiger when your avatar is made of paper ...perhaps it has something to do with your attitude.
I did not know "French humour" was the English for "laughing when someone asks to be civil after having made ad hominem attack". Thank you, I learn every day.
FlintLockwood wrote:
We pray you will learn everyday ,also learn to stop using Latin phrases in every second sentence to try show how educated you are only to fall back on your true nature in every other post by being rude.
"Ad hominem" is pretty much common knowledge and much shorter than translating it into another language while maintaining the full meaning. I also appreciate the irony of you using an ad hominem to show why Irontiger shouldn't use the term "ad hominem". Good job.
You should take some time to read this thoroughly:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement1.svg
That's all well and good.
Now. About Ivanov?
netzach wrote:
That's all well and good.
Now. About Ivanov?
In some sense, isn't competitive chess in danger of becoming a joke if you can detect cheating only if the guy takes the most obvious route available by simply letting a widely distributed engine play on full strength?
I don't know how the statistical analysis comparing engines vs. humans works, so maybe someone with more knowledge could elaborate whether you can work around these detection methods by adjusting the playing strength of engine help to a level where it's not distinguishable from natural increasing of playing ability over longer periods of time.
There is no way he could be cheating, because I did not see a desktop PC next to him running Houdini, and I myself cannot imagine any more clever way to cheat than by doing that. Ergo, he is innocent.