Chess Player Strip Searched

[Michael Flatt]

Yet they are talking of mixing online ratings with over the board.

I thought the exact proposal was that the change in OTB rating would be added to the Arena rating. This preserves the OTB rating from contamination

This point came up before. Roger is correct and it already happens. A players profile on the FIDE includes an online rating which incorporates a players over-the-board results.

[MartinCarpenter]

What puzzles me is that the player refused to open his shirt but then agreed to pass through a metal detector, which revealed the pendant around his neck. Had he refused to submit to the metal detector check, would he have got away with it?

You'd hope not but you do need to have written the rules of your competitions (Or of chess in general I suppose) sensibly, or you might have trouble.

The online stuff is just scary of course.

[Kevin Thurlow]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ition.html

I know this has been mentioned before, but I was struck by the DM publishing two photographs, both of which are nonsensical.

[Brian Towers]

What puzzles me is that the player refused to open his shirt but then agreed to pass through a metal detector, which revealed the pendant around his neck. Had he refused to submit to the metal detector check, would he have got away with it?

According to the DM article above the player did not agree to go through the metal detector:

So the referee hatched a plan, and had a metal detector put in before the competitors arrived - and when Ricciardi walked through, it went off.

he just wasn't told about it.

[Stewart Reuben]

Extract from The Minutes of the Qualification Commission.
They were asked to approve a proposal under which some games played using the interface will be approved for rating as standard games. This is a one year trial period SOLELY for team matches.
The commission voted 5 against, 3 for and 1 abstention.
In the Executive Board meeting the Deputy President, Makro, said that the opposition was not solid enough. Therefore the experiment would take place. This is against the FIDE statutes as only the General Assembly has the right to overrule the QC (or Rules Commission).

[Michael Flatt]

Some pictures of the equipment used.

1. Equipment http://blog.chesslogger.com/2015/09/api ... peria.html
2. Tournament website: http://www.imperiascacchi.it/
3. Ricciardi's games: http://www.scacchierando.it/tornei_/tor ... di-imperia

[MartinCarpenter]

I must admit that I am slightly surprised that a spy camera placed like that would work consistently enough to be hugely useful. Suppose if some competent human ally on the other end it'd help a lot.

I'd definitely expect that soon enough they'd have a game where a piece or two got on the wrong squares and his play simply stopped making any sense. Somewhat of a give away.

[Chris Rice]

r3kb1r/1pp1np1p/p1pq2p1/Q4b2/8/3P1N2/PPPN1PPP/R1B2RK1 w kq - 0 1

Ricciardi (1829) - Mazur (2378), Imperia 2015 White to move

I guess if there was a was to detect that a player was using computer assistance it would be in a position like this. For a player rated at 1829 then you would think the moves 1 Qc3 or 1 Nc4 would be the only moves they would be looking at. Indeed both are good moves when I put it on Deep Fritz 13. However, the number one move which Ricciardi actually played was the seemingly nonsensical at first sight 1 g4!! Such a move would never have crossed my mind but when you realize that once the bishop moves that 2 Ne4 is an absolute killer as 2...Qd8 leaves 3 Nf6 mate or the win of the queen if he plays 2...Qd7 then its really a lovely finish. However, it is only a move or 2 deep and if we didn't know he was cheating it would have been difficult to argue that such a move was beyond the ability of an 1829 player who just happened to be seeing everything clearly that day.

[MartinCarpenter]

Looks well within the capabilities really - seems very hard to see at first, but if you're looking at Nc4 then you're at least a fair way to also looking at Ne4, and once you do that/see how strong that move potentially is, g4 isn't so hard to dream up

[Roger de Coverly]

I guess if there was a was to detect that a player was using computer assistance it would be in a position like this.

It's quite recognisably "just out of the opening", so a computer assisted move could be home preparation just as much as on the fly. Basically he was caught because he was wearing a strange set of equipment. I would have thought the advice to anyone taking a pendant incorporating a camera to a chess tournament is don't. Equally having mystery boxes taped to your person is out as well.

Is it known whether there was an accomplice? If not and he's built a means of capturing moves using a camera, then he may have discovered a valid alternative to DGT boards.

[MartinCarpenter]

I think it would be quite odd if there wasn't an accomplice? Reliable auto interpretation of precisely which piece is where is maybe possible - I'd worry about errors if fully auto though as one error is quite enough to firmly break everything - is not at all easy from a photograph. Well until someone solves it once of course

It'd certainly have involved disproportionate effort compared to the method used to pass information back again - a box under your arm pit so you have to permanently sit in a really odd position? Really not the best solution.

[Clive Blackburn]

It'd certainly have involved disproportionate effort compared to the method used to pass information back again - a box under your arm pit so you have to permanently sit in a really odd position? Really not the best solution.

I wasn't sure about the Morse Code solution either. To transmit a move using full algebraic, you only need to send 4 characters, each of which can have one of eight possible values. It would be easy to devise a much simpler system - for instance, you could just send dots and no dashes and the player would simply have to count them. Less scope for error that way and no furiously twitching eyebrows!

[NickFaulks]

Looks well within the capabilities really - seems very hard to see at first, but if you're looking at Nc4 then you're at least a fair way to also looking at Ne4, and once you do that/see how strong that move potentially is, g4 isn't so hard to dream up

I would be disappointed if I didn't see g4. The reason my rating is low is that I tend to play such moves even when they don't quite work.

[Stewart Reuben]

Roger >If not and he's built a means of capturing moves using a camera, then he may have discovered a valid alternative to DGT boards.<

In Abu Dhabi we were introduced to such a system, though not shown it, devised by Israelis. The camera is on a stilt overlooking the game. The image goes to a computer which interprets the image as the usual 2D with up to 32 pieces. It is early days, but was used on ome boards in the European Championship.

[MartinCarpenter]

Much easier problem from a fixed, clear viewpoint mind.

Oh, if anyone wants a fun cheating case from bridge there's Lotan Fisher and Ron Schwartz. Nil direct evidence, a lot of rumours/statistical investigations. Teammates convinced enough to give back some trophies. Israel bridge fed doing a formal investigation.

This is much the sane end of this, although top Bridge players obviously biased to be quite good at stats http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/t ... ypothesis/

Very difficult of course. Likely much more so than trying to catch the direct parroting of computer moves.