eddysallin wrote:
What i don't get...Do chess players believe cheating has not been going on since ratings/money become a part of chess ?
I don't think that it's that common, at around my level anyway
Ivanov speaks out!
Sort:
Reading the interview, young people will hopefully realize that dopemen just can't be trusted.
Jan 28, 2013
0
#24
Ivanov is not only cheater, he is arrogant ignorant liar on top of that...
Let's imagine I am the Satan and Ivanov goes to Hell. I would happily let him play Houdini, Rybka, Stockfish, Firebird or any other modern chess engine he chooses, and agree to release him to Heaven if he wins 10-0. He would have almost no chance to win a single game out of ten.
waffllemaster wrote:
FirebrandX wrote:
mvtjc wrote:
It's funny that people accuse others without proof.. Yes, I also think he cheated since logically, we base our judgement on past achievements, elo rating, etc. but just saying that he is a cheater wihtout proof doesn't make any sense...
Watch Valeri Lilov's videos on the this particular subject (including his followup that addresses Mr. Ivanov's offensive remarks). You'll either change your mind or remain naive.
Unfortunately it takes years of chess skill and knowledge to see that Mr. Ivanov really was cheating. Those that aren't very familiar and knowledgable with master-level play and computer-assisted play will not be able to appreciate just how blatant the games in question were.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Jr0J8SPENjM
Wow, I just watched the 70 minute long video... this guy wasn't even cheating smart, not even trying to hide it at all, and in multiple tournaments. As a chess player this guy is 100% trash to me. Only a lifetime ban by FIDE is satisfactory. Unbelievable.
Those are pretty compelling videos.
Jan 28, 2013
0
#26
Polar_Bear wrote:
Ivanov is not only cheater, he is arrogant ignorant liar on top of that...
Let's imagine I am the Satan and Ivanov goes to Hell. I would happily let him play Houdini, Rybka, Stockfish, Firebird or any other modern chess engine he chooses, and agree to release him to Heaven if he wins 10-0. He would have almost no chance to win a single game out of ten.
lol.
Jan 28, 2013
0
#27
Ubik42 wrote:
iacogio wrote:
I believe the 2nd video by Lilov is scary, because it poses one question that Ivanov's defenders don't answer.
What if someone is behind Ivanov, and this year they start to run this scam at high level (not as rating, but just escalating), with 20-50 players in different tournaments?
They could offer 50% of the prize, and some tournaments do have good money prizes (but of course it could be used for gambling), and the player will not reveal the scam, because he would be banished.
It is the end of OTB chess.
I have been thinking for some time that this will eventually kill big money tournaments, and with it, big chess. Without big money to attract top players, likely will be a decline of skill. We could very well be seeing the apex of human ability in chess, right now, with Carlsen, and its all downhill from here.
i think the organizers could have isolated ivanov from receiving physical signals and ceased the live transmission of his games much earlier to prevent him receiving digital ones and that would be the end of the problem.
Another Armstrong.
But Armstrong was at least nice to watch! :)
eddysallin wrote:
What i don't get...Do chess players believe cheating has not been going on since ratings/money become a part of chess ?
True, here is one of the early cheating computer systems:
Its USCF rating was allegedly nearly 20.
lol he didn't even try to stay clean with that "I won against Houdini 10-0". That's the worst one could say after such an event.
The "I beat Houdini and Rybka ten nil" crack is, like quite a bit of the interview, intended lightheartedly gentlemen.
After watching the first youtube video I'd say that if Mr Ivanov wanted to sue for defamation in England I believe I'd take his case.
He would certainly have an impressively wide choice as to whom to include in his action.
johnyoudell wrote:
The "I beat Houdini and Rybka ten nil" crack is, like quite a bit of the interview, intended lightheartedly gentlemen.
After watching the first youtube video I'd say that if Mr Ivanov wanted to sue for defamation in England I believe I'd take his case.
He would certainly have an impressively wide choice as to whom to include in his action.
It is obviously a joke... I have no idea why people are taking it seriously. However, if you watch the games and have a decent understanding of how computers and humans think, I don't think there is much room for "reasonable" doubt that he used an engine. I think some of Lilov's accusation are a little passionate and maybe not completely true but it surely seems to me that this player used a computer.
Of course, given this, there is no proof. So I'm not sure it was appropriate to attack him like this.. in my eyes, however, the games speak for themselves...
Also, I have continued watching the video. After he lost the 2nd game, please watch the third game either in Lilov's video or with your own method of analysis. If you can say with a full convinction that a human played this game (including Magnus Carlsen) you should seek some help :D.
In addition to all of this evidence... how can a non-professional possibly play Slav, Grunfeld, and Benoni against strong Grandmasters with reasonable sucess! Very interesting...
Not even Carlsen can beat Houdini and Rybka 10-0...I rest my case your honour.
Yes, it is like Lance Dopestrong...we all knew he was cheating, just not how?
And which other master/GM can play about 500 points above his/her rating? About time FIDE wakes up and makes all games broadcast-delayed.
I think Ivanov would know if he was cheating...
Jan 28, 2013
0
#37
@johnyoudell: Everybody has the right on a good defense, also Mr. Ivanov when he is accused of cheating. It is very important that the quality of the defense is unrelated to the public opinion about the accused. I think we agree on that. But from that perspective does your remark surprise me: do you only take cases that you think you will win or which you perceive as justified? Would you not defend Mr. Lilov?
Furthermore do I think that the defense of Mr. Ivanov has a peculiar problem of finding experts supporting his claim that he did not cheat. A lot of GM's (the well known experts in the fields) are convinced that he cheated. Who will you use to testify? Or should he play a match against Mr. Lilov? The prize of that match is honesty. :-)
I am not a good chess player, but even I can see the vast difference in his older games and the games of that tournament. It is not difficult to see that prior to that tournament he did not have a thorough understanding of some positions, but he suddenly managed to beat GM's with a very high rating. That kind of progression in that short period of time is to say the least, against all odds.
Your best 'witnesses' are as far as I can see statistics and proofs that miracles do exist. But is it defamation when the chance that it is true is that small? Is that beyond reasonable doubt?
It's people like you that give the human race a bad reputation.
This comment is neither relevant, helpful or nice; it is boorish though.
jesterville wrote:
About time FIDE wakes up and makes all games broadcast-delayed.
I'm surprised they're not already.
Jan 28, 2013
0
#40
FirebrandX wrote:
cookiemonster161140 wrote:
Fascinating, it's the "he beat me, therefore he must be a cheater" method of cheat detection again.
Yet another troll that didn't bother to watch the videos and pay attention. I swear every one of you types need to suffer in the depths of hell for a few million years. That should set you straight.
+1 ...well said, thank you.
What i don't get...Do chess players believe cheating has not been going on since ratings/money become a part of chess ?