Had anyone troubled to listen maybe wouldn't have sent money and guns?
This is an incomplete sentence. I was hoping to get you to clarify what this meant without having to be rude and point it out. Who should someone had listen to? Did those who went unheard send money and guns somewhere? Where?
I wonder if you're talking about the IRA, the Irish War of Independence, or the Troubles.
Had anyone troubled to listen maybe wouldn't have sent money and guns?
This is an incomplete sentence. I was hoping to get you to clarify what this meant without having to be rude and point it out. Who should someone had listen to? Did those who went unheard send money and guns somewhere? Where?
I wonder if you're talking about the IRA, the Irish War of Independence, or the Troubles.
News may be 'watched' or 'listened' to depending on the media. Radio is still alive and well here.
Chess.com Forums is a Scam!
You Sign up on the Site and...
They Start asking for Money!?
If you don't join your Banned!?
It's Not about Chess!!
Really really really really dumb.
Had anyone troubled to listen maybe wouldn't have sent money and guns?
This is an incomplete sentence. I was hoping to get you to clarify what this meant without having to be rude and point it out. Who should someone had listen to? Did those who went unheard send money and guns somewhere? Where?
I wonder if you're talking about the IRA, the Irish War of Independence, or the Troubles.
FYI, netzach is a notorious troll on these boards. His favorite method of posting is to pull a "drive-by" comment designed to either insult or enrage his target. Be warned.
You're a role-model yourself FX with your centaur/computer derived chess.
The entire site idolises and adores you.
I wonder how Clark Smiley is going to explain this to the colleges he applies to if he actually chooses to go to college and applies(since all one has to do is google his name "Clark Smiley" and click on the "Search" button to find out that he had been caught cheating in chess). I don't think Clark really thought about the long-term consequences of what could happen if he got caught cheating when he decided to start his little cheating spree using his little PDA.
In my humble opinion, using technology for chess analysis just takes the fun out of playing the game of chess.
100% true. Any player could be perfect in openings and middlegames, but if he's not good in endgames, he won't win often (unless early resign). It's not won until you've won it!There's a lot of paths from openings to a single ending, but there's only ONE path from that ending to a won game...
A little off topic, but that statement seems demonstrably false ;). In most any pawn up endgame with multiple pawns, the player that promotes their pawn very often has the option of winning with the resulting queen vs. whatever other material is left. They also have the option of using said queen to force a second pawn promotion. Often these two completely different options are both completely unstoppable, and in some games, can even take roughly the same number of moves and so one cannot even add a "best play" disclaimer to the statement...
This type of cheating can also occur in correspondence chess.
Monroi?
Well unless there is 'spycam' in your lounge kind of doubt would be detectable.
He played tournament chess. He's, obviously, interested in chess.
Of course he knew he was acting immorally. He needs to be punished.
The punishment, though, should be a reasonable one.
If he didn't play tournament chess there would be no prize money and no good excuse for typing away at his compter the whole time
This wouldn't be an issue under FIDE rules.
Tell your stupid USCF to ban any electronic aid, including cellphones (which is 100% FIDE rules compliant). A player should be only be aided by his pencil, and a sheet of paper (and he shouln't be allowed even using those aids to make notes during the game).
This x 1000
If USCF allows the use of electonic devices during a game then calling them stupid is very charitable.
The rules have been tightened up. Now only electronic devices approved by the USCF are allowed. (meaning electronic score keeping devices made for that purpose only)
What if I have a pencil case that actually has an iphone hidden within? How about a watch with a link to the top computers in the UK with a hearing aid that transmits inaudiable messages and can't be intercepted and/or decoded by others? Yes, I'm the guy writing the new James Bond movie. Don't go and see it!
I don't have a problem posting his photo.
His rapid rating climb is all the proof I need that he was cheating long before he got caught. You'd have to be very naive to think otherwise.
He needs to reimburse all the players he cheated.
"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time."
Scholastic players get rating climbs more or less comonly,still if your rating shoots up over the course of seven months (assuming it's an OTB rating) I agree that it's good grounds to be suspicious.
This wouldn't be an issue under FIDE rules.
Tell your stupid USCF to ban any electronic aid, including cellphones (which is 100% FIDE rules compliant). A player should be only be aided by his pencil, and a sheet of paper (and he shouln't be allowed even using those aids to make notes during the game).
Perhaps you need a better understanding of USCF (and FIDE) rules prior to commenting...not to mention the software under discussion.
(1) FIDE allows MonRoi.
(2) eNotate is software. MonRoi is dedicated hardware.
(3) eNotate has a tournament mode. If run in tournament mode, you can't even run any other program on the device without completely quitting eNotate. Of course, if eNotate is run outside of tournament mode, all bets are off.
(4) eNotate was not hacked in this case. Since eNotate is software, it's possible to run it in parallel with another program. However, it's pretty obvious if someone tries to switch between programs. Recording a move electronically should require two taps of a stylus - MAYBE a few more, at most, if you make a mistake. And the device shouldn't be constantly in the player's hands - just like a paper scoresheet shouldn't.
(5) The TD in this case was watching him, as he should watch all players.
(6) USCF and FIDE rules both require the scoresheet to be visible to the TD/arbiter at all times.
Rapid rating climbs, in and of themselves, aren't sufficient grounds to claim a player cheated, especially a teen or pre-teen player. Combined with extremely suspicious behavior such as Mr. Smiley's, though, it most certainly provides a highly compelling circumstantial case.
(2) Hacking hardware or faking software in order to cheat reaches the same ends regardless. If anything, it would be even easier to fake the software, since that's just a matter of coding an app to look like it.
(3) See #2.
(4) See #2. When the app itself is the fake, you don't have to switch apps.
(5) It's impossible to watch all players all the time. You've only got one spot you can focus on at any given moment. You'd need a TD for every board in the room to cover everything.
(6) Required, but hardly enforced. The tournaments I've participated in, the TDs sit at a desk, and you end up having to pause the clock to go fetch them over an issue or dispute.
(1) You are, of course, welcome to your opinion. My opinion? It's not a mistake at all. There's nothing wrong with electronic scorekeeping, especially on a device that can only run that program. Both MonRoi and Plycount (recently approved for USCF rules) are dedicated to only that purpose. I've run plenty of tournaments where even GMs use MonRoi, and the device has a lot of application beyond just filling databases.
(2) The concerns about hacking software (eNotate) are overblown, IMO - and the concerns about trying to replicate hardware (MonRoi) are even more so. Most tournaments, there isn't anywhere near enough on the line to justify the time and expertise needed to do that successfully. And at the tournaments where there is enough on the line, the TD staff is aware of the possibility and watches players in prize contention very closely, especially as the event moves to later rounds. Cell phones and other devices, in my experience, are a bigger threat to go undetected than electronic scoresheets.
(3) See #2.
(4) See #2. Also, directors have the right to inspect any scoresheet, electronic or otherwise. If I know the program, I should be familiar with how it operates. And, AGAIN, entering a move only takes a couple of taps with a stylus, and the device should be on the table in plain view at all times.
(5) The larger the tournament, obviously, the less likely it is that there's just one TD. This is exponentially more true for a scholastic tournament. However, having covered a tournament room of over 200+ players by myself on many occasions, I can say that it's not THAT hard to know where the potential trouble spots are. At the start of a round, you look for clock setting issues, players with electronic scorekeeping devices, analog clocks, games with no clocks, games with missing players, etc., and take notes. Many good directors do this.
(6) Generally speaking, there are only so many directors. When an issue arises, you're supposed to stop the clock and get a director, per the rules. If you want a director/arbiter to be there as soon as an issue arises, either (1) play exclusively in small club tournaments, or (2) get into high-level round-robins.
You really don't have a clue. Do you?
Well you should with bombs going off in your own country nowadays.