So, did that turn out that what's his name wasn't cheating after all?

Can't remember name. Edit: Borislav Ivanov.

cheater_1 daeth...

Borislav Ivanov.

There will always be cheaters, we just need to let people know who they are and shun them. We can not let it cause us not to have fun playing the hundreds of non cheaters.

nOT WHAT i ASKED.

I can't believe nobody knows.

He did cheat, hence the legend of The Great Shoedini.

The legend.

I can't find the thread now, but somebody on there said he wasn't cheating after all, and would bet there would be no more posts, and there haven't been.

Was there some convincing analysis showing he didn't cheat?  Seemed very likely he was.

FIDE setup a trial type thing for borislav to come in and prove that he wasn't cheating by analysing his skill level, but he never showed. Since then I guess he's been laying low, or finding it hard to get into tournaments.

I think the concensus is that he was cheating, but there's no evidence, mostly because ivanov runs away whenever an attempt is made to proove if he is innocent or not.

Yes that is what Conflagration Planet just said.  Be reasonable and listen.  

Borislav Ivanov was expelled from the Bulgarian Chess Federation. As a result he is no longer registered with FIDE. 

http://ratings.fide.com/view_games.phtml?id=2903741
http://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=2903741

Weird that statement was made, then.

What some of the players should have done is gotten together and as he got up from the table on one of his trips to the bathroom, intercept him in the hallway, pin his arms to his sides, and pull off his shoes.

Then they would know for sure if he had anything inside them.

If nothing was found they could have apologized for the "prank" and made up for it by taking him out to dinner later that evening. 

If he did have an electronic device inside, they would have found out immediately and known for sure.

If I was doing well in a tournament or two, and then the arbiter suspected I was cheating via a device in my shoe, I would have thanked them for the compliment and ripped off my shoes immediately.  If they saw what they thought was a suspcious bulge in my jacket, I would have taken it off and given it to them for inspection.

If I'm in a store and a security officer wants to look in my bag, because he thinks I put a store item in there, I'd give it to him immediately.

The point is, most people who are innocent are quick and happy to prove it.

If a security officer at a store wanted to look in my bag, I'd tell him to f off.  People who are innocent don't like being accused of misbehavior either.

Yes, you could tell him to F off but it wouldn't do you any good.  If he had reason to believe you put something in your bag, as soon as you left the store without paying for it he would have the right to apprehend you and/or call the police so that your bag could be searched.

Thus, you would have saved yourself a bunch of time if you had just shown him the contents of your bag when he asked. 

That security officer is just doing his job.  Your actions in the store probably led him to believe you put something in there.  For you to tell him to F off says a lot about your personality.

Or it could be racial profiling.  That's also a thing that affects some people.

I'd rather tell him to F off and make him do his job right.  Most security personnel these days are taught not to approach anyone unless they are sure and until the person leaves the store showing intent to steal anyway.  My purpose in life is not to make his job easier.  If he's going to hassle me and think I was stealing, he's not getting off easy.

And yes it does say a lot about my personality.  I don't take false allegations about my character lightly.

I still think his reluctance to comply with the searches was a very strong sign he was cheating. I don't think an innocent person would have reacted that way.