Forums

Ivanov speaks out!

Sort:
rusconi
rusconi
Feb 10, 2013
0
#321
SmyslovFan wrote:

Rusconi, FIDE and the Bulgarian Chess Federation do not currently have a method for analysing games to determine whether a player cheated. As a result of Ivanov's performance, FIDE is now being asked to come up with a method of detection. Kenneth Regan, an IM and statistician, has written to FIDE to start discussing how to do this. 

Ivanov cheated, that much is clear. The question is whether a statistical analysis alone is enough for FIDE to ban him. This analysis has been good enough in the USCF, and it will probably be good enough for FIDE too.

The fact that a person hasn't been punished for a crime doesn't make him guilty or innnocent.

I do understand that some people here have comprehension difficulties, maybe they didn't go to a good school, and obviously lack the reasoning tools they do need to understand "facts."

But let's come up with a simple example: in the country of Ruthania there are no speeding laws- Ivanov is driving at 100 mph (but he could drive at 65, 45, 111, it doesn't matter). Now you say: he is speeding for the USCF laws (but strangely you forgot to mention which laws where approved by USCF, which were not approved by FIDE, since the USCF is under FIDE, not the contrary). Great, but Ruthania is not under USCF jurisdiction. Ruthania is under FIDE jurisdiction, which you just admitted doesn't have a law about it, or even the tools to detect the speeding.

 So now we return to the "facts," hoping you have something relevant to say:

1. Is Ivanov under investigation for cheating by FIDE? Can you mention the committee? Or Board review which is investigating him?

2. Is Ivanov under investigation for cheating by the Bulgarian federation? Again details which can be verified, since otherwise you are just slandering someone for your personal opinions, which are not based on facts.

3. Is he not playing at the 35th Bulgaria Open?

Maybe one day FIDE will rule out the matter, maybe FIDE one day will reject your BELIEF on statistical analysis as correct, because refuted by other mathematicians, till then, let's go on the facts: Ivanov is not a cheater, has not been banned by FIDE or the Bulgarian federation, and he is still playing chess like every other chess player.

ChessSponge
ChessSponge
Feb 10, 2013
0
#322
rusconi wrote

Maybe one day FIDE will rule out the matter, maybe FIDE one day will reject your BELIEF on statistical analysis as correct, because refuted by other mathematicians, till then, let's go on the facts: Ivanov is not a cheater, has not been banned by FIDE or the Bulgarian federation, and he is still playing chess like every other chess player.


Not being caught does not mean someone didn't cheat. That point should be really easy to understand.

 

For a long long time many people were aware that Lance Armstrong was doping up to win races. He denied it for a that whole time. He was initially investiagated and not found guilty.

Despite all that, he still cheated and eventually it all came out even though it was years after the fact. Just because at the time it wasn't 100% proven and ruled to be cheating doesn't mean he didn't cheat and now he has even confirmed he cheated by doping.

 

So why you would focus on only the fact he hasn't currently been ruled 100% to have cheated as proof that he hasn't cheated is baffling. That is not how a logical argument works.

rusconi
rusconi
Feb 10, 2013
0
#323
ChessSponge wrote:
rusconi wrote

Maybe one day FIDE will rule out the matter, maybe FIDE one day will reject your BELIEF on statistical analysis as correct, because refuted by other mathematicians, till then, let's go on the facts: Ivanov is not a cheater, has not been banned by FIDE or the Bulgarian federation, and he is still playing chess like every other chess player.


Not being caught does not mean someone didn't cheat. That point should be really easy to understand.

 

For a long long time many people were aware that Lance Armstrong was doping up to win races. He denied it for a that whole time. He was initially investiagated and not found guilty.

Despite all that, he still cheated and eventually it all came out even though it was years after the fact. Just because at the time it wasn't 100% proven and ruled to be cheating doesn't mean he didn't cheat and now he has even confirmed he cheated by doping.

 

So why you would focus on only the fact he hasn't currently been ruled 100% to have cheated as proof that he hasn't cheated is baffling. That is not how a logical argument works.

Again nothing relevant to say, just to avoid to admit you are wrong, you go to the length to mention another sport, which has nothing to do with chess, while at the same time you don't even explain which FIDE rules has Ivanov violated. Can you avoid to go off topic?

I made some simple questions, can you answer them? I quote them again here, so let's see if you answer them now:

1. Is Ivanov under investigation for cheating by FIDE? Can you mention the committee? Or Board review which is investigating him?

2. Is Ivanov under investigation for cheating by the Bulgarian federation? Again details which can be verified, since otherwise you are just slandering someone for your personal opinions, which are not based on facts.

3. Is he not playing at the 35th Bulgaria Open?

Crazychessplaya
Crazychessplaya
Feb 10, 2013
0
#324

Rusconi is too stupid to understand that cheaters use techniques that are sometimes difficult to detect.

Vease
Vease
Feb 10, 2013
0
#325

The fact that Ivanov has regressed back to his normal level of performance is another indication that he cheated at Zadar. If he was smarter he could have just kept using whatever communication device he had, win the Bulgarian Open undefeated and say 'Look, I've just been studying harder and got much better'. Now that he's losing to 1900 rated players again its pathetically obvious...

DrCheckevertim
DrCheckevertim
Feb 10, 2013
0
#326
rusconi wrote:
SmyslovFan wrote:

Rusconi, FIDE and the Bulgarian Chess Federation do not currently have a method for analysing games to determine whether a player cheated. As a result of Ivanov's performance, FIDE is now being asked to come up with a method of detection. Kenneth Regan, an IM and statistician, has written to FIDE to start discussing how to do this. 

Ivanov cheated, that much is clear. The question is whether a statistical analysis alone is enough for FIDE to ban him. This analysis has been good enough in the USCF, and it will probably be good enough for FIDE too.

The fact that a person hasn't been punished for a crime doesn't make him guilty or innnocent.

 

 

I do understand that some people here have comprehension difficulties, maybe they didn't go to a good school, and obviously lack the reasoning tools they do need to understand "facts."

But let's come up with a simple example: in the country of Ruthania there are no speeding laws- Ivanov is driving at 100 mph (but he could drive at 65, 45, 111, it doesn't matter). Now you say: he is speeding for the USCF laws (but strangely you forgot to mention which laws where approved by USCF, which were not approved by FIDE, since the USCF is under FIDE, not the contrary). Great, but Ruthania is not under USCF jurisdiction. Ruthania is under FIDE jurisdiction, which you just admitted doesn't have a law about it, or even the tools to detect the speeding.

 So now we return to the "facts," hoping you have something relevant to say:

1. Is Ivanov under investigation for cheating by FIDE? Can you mention the committee? Or Board review which is investigating him?

2. Is Ivanov under investigation for cheating by the Bulgarian federation? Again details which can be verified, since otherwise you are just slandering someone for your personal opinions, which are not based on facts.

3. Is he not playing at the 35th Bulgaria Open?

Maybe one day FIDE will rule out the matter, maybe FIDE one day will reject your BELIEF on statistical analysis as correct, because refuted by other mathematicians, till then, let's go on the facts: Ivanov is not a cheater, has not been banned by FIDE or the Bulgarian federation, and he is still playing chess like every other chess player.

You are making the statement that he didn't cheat just because he hasn't been banned yet. Which is a simple logical fallacy. Before you accuse people of not going to a good school, being unable to comprehend what they read, or being unable to reason... consider that everyone seems to see that your argument doesn't make sense.

rusconi
rusconi
Feb 10, 2013
0
#327
Crazychessplaya wrote:

Rusconi is too stupid to understand that cheaters use techniques that are sometimes difficult to detect.

It seems you are too stupid to answer a simple question like: which FIDE rules has Ivanov violated?

Let me know if you cannot even understand the question.

rusconi
rusconi
Feb 10, 2013
0
#328
checkevrytim wrote:
rusconi wrote:
SmyslovFan wrote:

Rusconi, FIDE and the Bulgarian Chess Federation do not currently have a method for analysing games to determine whether a player cheated. As a result of Ivanov's performance, FIDE is now being asked to come up with a method of detection. Kenneth Regan, an IM and statistician, has written to FIDE to start discussing how to do this. 

Ivanov cheated, that much is clear. The question is whether a statistical analysis alone is enough for FIDE to ban him. This analysis has been good enough in the USCF, and it will probably be good enough for FIDE too.

The fact that a person hasn't been punished for a crime doesn't make him guilty or innnocent.

 

 

I do understand that some people here have comprehension difficulties, maybe they didn't go to a good school, and obviously lack the reasoning tools they do need to understand "facts."

But let's come up with a simple example: in the country of Ruthania there are no speeding laws- Ivanov is driving at 100 mph (but he could drive at 65, 45, 111, it doesn't matter). Now you say: he is speeding for the USCF laws (but strangely you forgot to mention which laws where approved by USCF, which were not approved by FIDE, since the USCF is under FIDE, not the contrary). Great, but Ruthania is not under USCF jurisdiction. Ruthania is under FIDE jurisdiction, which you just admitted doesn't have a law about it, or even the tools to detect the speeding.

 So now we return to the "facts," hoping you have something relevant to say:

1. Is Ivanov under investigation for cheating by FIDE? Can you mention the committee? Or Board review which is investigating him?

2. Is Ivanov under investigation for cheating by the Bulgarian federation? Again details which can be verified, since otherwise you are just slandering someone for your personal opinions, which are not based on facts.

3. Is he not playing at the 35th Bulgaria Open?

Maybe one day FIDE will rule out the matter, maybe FIDE one day will reject your BELIEF on statistical analysis as correct, because refuted by other mathematicians, till then, let's go on the facts: Ivanov is not a cheater, has not been banned by FIDE or the Bulgarian federation, and he is still playing chess like every other chess player.

You are making the statement that he didn't cheat just because he hasn't been banned yet. Which is a simple logical fallacy. Before you accuse people of not going to a good school, being unable to comprehend what they read, or being unable to reason... consider that everyone seems to see that your argument doesn't make sense.

Again off-topic, why are you so afraid to answer some simple questions if you are correct?

I made some simple questions, can you answer them? I quote them again here, so let's see if you answer them now:

1. Is Ivanov under investigation for cheating by FIDE? Can you mention the committee? Or Board review which is investigating him?

2. Is Ivanov under investigation for cheating by the Bulgarian federation? Again details which can be verified, since otherwise you are just slandering someone for your personal opinions, which are not based on facts.

3. Is he not playing at the 35th Bulgaria Open?

SmyslovFan
SmyslovFan
Show your flair!
Feb 10, 2013
0
#329

Bypassing the personal attacks...

Here are the pertinent Laws of Chess, as provided by FIDE:

12.3
  1. During play the players are forbidden to make use of any notes, sources of information or advice, or analyse on another chessboard
  2. Without the permission of the arbiter a player is forbidden to have a mobile phone or other electronic means of communication in the playing venue, unless they are completely switched off. ...

 

If a player breaks those rules, he is cheating. The only question is not whether these are the rules, but whether Ivanov broke these rules. I am certain beyond a reasonable doubt that he did cheat because I believe in the evidence presented by Kenneth Regan. 

To use the analogy of Ruthania... Let's say that Ruthania has laws against murder. They find that somebody is dead, and that the person died under suspicious circumstances. It looks like he was strangled to death. They find the most likely culprit and check him for weapons. None are found. But later, a forensics analysis of the victim shows the culprit's fingerprints in the bruised area on the victim's neck.

It turns out that Ruthania doesn't have the technology yet to analyse fingerprint evidence. Experts from other countries come in and show Ruthania how to use both fingerprint evidence and DNA evidence. 

It may be too late to convict the culprit in this case, because Ruthania may or may not have a statue of limitations on murder. That's unclear. But Ruthania will probably convict future murderers based on fingerprint and DNA evidence.
Crazychessplaya
Crazychessplaya
Feb 10, 2013
0
#330

rusconi wrote:

Crazychessplaya wrote:

Rusconi is too stupid to understand that cheaters use techniques that are sometimes difficult to detect.

It seems you are too stupid to answer a simple question like: which FIDE rules has Ivanov violated?

Let me know if you cannot even understand the question.

FIDE is a corrupt institution run by a man who claims to have been abducted by the aliens. Only idiots such as yourself will pay any attention to what FIDE does or does not do in terms of protecting the chess community from cheaters.

DrCheckevertim
DrCheckevertim
Feb 10, 2013
0
#331

1. I don't know. Probably.

2. I don't know. Perhaps.

3. Yes he is playing in a tournament.

 

He still could have cheated no matter the answer to any of those questions.

The evidence highly suggests that he cheated. That is why he is under investigation by the "very good chess player" community. The results of that investigation are pretty clear.


Even if he wasn't under investigation by anyone, he still could have cheated. Not being under investigation doesn't mean that he didn't cheat. Being able to continue playing tournaments doesn't mean he didn't cheat.

rusconi
rusconi
Feb 10, 2013
0
#332
SmyslovFan wrote:

Bypassing the personal attacks...

Here are the pertinent Laws of Chess, as provided by FIDE:

12.3

During play the players are forbidden to make use of any notes, sources of information or advice, or analyse on another chessboard Without the permission of the arbiter a player is forbidden to have a mobile phone or other electronic means of communication in the playing venue, unless they are completely switched off. ...

 

If a player breaks those rules, he is cheating. The only question is not whether these are the rules, but whether Ivanov broke these rules. I am certain beyond a reasonable doubt that he did cheat because I believe in the evidence presented by Kenneth Regan. 

To use the analogy of Ruthania... Let's say that Ruthania has laws against murder. They find that somebody is dead, and that the person died under suspicious circumstances. It looks like he was strangled to death. They find the most likely culprit and check him for weapons. None are found. But later, a forensics analysis of the victim shows the culprit's fingerprints in the bruised area on the victim's neck.

It turns out that Ruthania doesn't have the technology yet to analyse fingerprint evidence. Experts from other countries come in and show Ruthania how to use both fingerprint evidence and DNA evidence. 

It may be too late to convict the culprit in this case, because Ruthania may or may not have a statue of limitations on murder. That's unclear. But Ruthania will probably convict future murderers based on fingerprint and DNA evidence.

So you admit you like to lynch someone instead of finding out the truth.

You are not able to prove that he received advice or analysis. You just admit that you believe someone else, who has not been verified scientifically, and which could be wrong.

So let me understand: what do you say to the families of those who have been convicted of crimes they didn't do, and spent years in prison (or were murdered by the state), just based on your "beyond reasonable doubt" made up by juries who strangely found such doubt not existing based on the color of the skin? (And I hope you can check the statistics too, or that would damage your belief??)

DrCheckevertim
DrCheckevertim
Feb 10, 2013
0
#333
rusconi wrote:
SmyslovFan wrote:

Bypassing the personal attacks...

Here are the pertinent Laws of Chess, as provided by FIDE:

12.3

During play the players are forbidden to make use of any notes, sources of information or advice, or analyse on another chessboard Without the permission of the arbiter a player is forbidden to have a mobile phone or other electronic means of communication in the playing venue, unless they are completely switched off. ...

 

If a player breaks those rules, he is cheating. The only question is not whether these are the rules, but whether Ivanov broke these rules. I am certain beyond a reasonable doubt that he did cheat because I believe in the evidence presented by Kenneth Regan. 

To use the analogy of Ruthania... Let's say that Ruthania has laws against murder. They find that somebody is dead, and that the person died under suspicious circumstances. It looks like he was strangled to death. They find the most likely culprit and check him for weapons. None are found. But later, a forensics analysis of the victim shows the culprit's fingerprints in the bruised area on the victim's neck.

It turns out that Ruthania doesn't have the technology yet to analyse fingerprint evidence. Experts from other countries come in and show Ruthania how to use both fingerprint evidence and DNA evidence. 

It may be too late to convict the culprit in this case, because Ruthania may or may not have a statue of limitations on murder. That's unclear. But Ruthania will probably convict future murderers based on fingerprint and DNA evidence.

So you admit you like to lynch someone instead of finding out the truth.

You are not able to prove that he received advice or analysis. You just admit that you believe someone else, who has not been verified scientifically, and which could be wrong.

So let me understand: what do you say to the families of those who have been convicted of crimes they didn't do, and spent years in prison (or were murdered by the state), just based on your "beyond reasonable doubt" made up by juries who strangely found such doubt not existing based on the color of the skin? (And I hope you can check the statistics too, or that would damage your belief??)

This isn't life and death.

If someone is almost surely cheating, they have the power to ruin tournaments for everyone. If the evidence shows a 99.9% chance of cheating (which it does, if you examined it) rather than 100% chance of cheating, it is fair to ban that player from chess tournaments for the sake of others.

Crazychessplaya
Crazychessplaya
Feb 10, 2013
0
#334

Something for rusconi to watch, to assess the credibility of FIDE:

Scottrf
Scottrf
Feb 10, 2013
0
#335

Rusconi is a moron who spends his time writing about how easy the TT problems are, while having an average rating himself. Don't waste your time.

DrCheckevertim
DrCheckevertim
Feb 10, 2013
0
#336

"dense" perhaps

rusconi
rusconi
Feb 10, 2013
0
#337
Scottrf wrote:

Rusconi is a moron who spends his time writing about how easy the TT problems are, while having an average rating himself. Don't waste your time.

So I am a moron with a TT rating of 2050, while you are a genius with a TT rating of 1575?? Before to give someone else a name, because you are so retarded that you cannot even dismount the "facts" I've mentioned and that you don't like, at least watch your ratings.

Scottrf
Scottrf
Feb 10, 2013
0
#338
rusconi wrote:
Scottrf wrote:

Rusconi is a moron who spends his time writing about how easy the TT problems are, while having an average rating himself. Don't waste your time.

So I am a moron with a TT rating of 2050, while you are a genius with a TT rating of 1575?? Before to give someone else a name, because you are so retarded that you cannot even dismount the "facts" I've mentioned and that you don't like, at least watch your ratings.

If you actually looked, it's been recently reset. It was 2250, and more importantly I don't post my scores and write 'easy', calling people stupid for missing them.

rusconi
rusconi
Feb 10, 2013
0
#339
FirebrandX wrote:

Rusconi is either:

A. Trolling.

B. Completely ignorant (likes to use the term "lynching" because of his complete lack of knowledge about chess engine output versus human play).

C. Personality disorder (has grown up thinking circumstantial evidence, no matter how blatant, somehow "doesn't count").

D. All of the above.

So I'm a troll, but you like everyone else cannot answer the 3 simple questions I have made, and surely shoudn't be difficult in the age of internet to make a copy and paste from FIDE. Here the questions:

1. Is Ivanov under investigation for cheating by FIDE? Can you mention the committee? Or Board review which is investigating him?

2. Is Ivanov under investigation for cheating by the Bulgarian federation? Again details which can be verified, since otherwise you are just slandering someone for your personal opinions, which are not based on facts.

 

3. Is he not playing at the 35th Bulgaria Open?

rusconi
rusconi
Feb 10, 2013
0
#340
Scottrf wrote:
rusconi wrote:
Scottrf wrote:

Rusconi is a moron who spends his time writing about how easy the TT problems are, while having an average rating himself. Don't waste your time.

So I am a moron with a TT rating of 2050, while you are a genius with a TT rating of 1575?? Before to give someone else a name, because you are so retarded that you cannot even dismount the "facts" I've mentioned and that you don't like, at least watch your ratings.

If you actually looked, it's been recently reset. It was 2250, and more importantly I don't post my scores and write 'easy', calling people stupid for missing them.

I'm sorry if in your fascist state of mind people don't have the right to express opinions about a TT position, but again let's go to the facts, since you just slandered me: could you quote the TT position in which I made a comment and said that the other people are stupid??

If you can't, and this is the case, because I don't have your ego problems (maybe go to visit a psych and will help you understand that not everyone out there is writing about you, and get some chill pills) then admit that you are wrong, otherwise you just slandered me, to try being right, when you clearly are not.