Page 8 of 15

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 1:58 pm
by Paolo Casaschi
NickFaulks wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 6:23 pm
Chris Rice wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 4:03 pm
However, one surely has to question the legality of having a camera installed in the bathroom?
I wonder what they've done with footage of other patrons who were using the facility for its legitimate purpose. Makes you wonder.
I also wonder how many arbiters/organisers thought someone might be cheating and took the liberty of taking bathroom pictures, then avoiding advertising the event when no cheating was detected.

This sets a very dangerous precedent: should chess players going forward expect that someone might take bathroom pictures of them if anyone suspects them of cheating?

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 2:04 pm
by Paolo Casaschi
Nick Grey wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 12:03 pm
That the photo has made page 3 of The Sun puts the case into the public domain and a quote from Gormally -'It's amazing Rausis wasn't stopped earlier...
Perhaps there will be more checking of unusual improvements.
Such great news to attract more players to chess, especially youngsters and women: if your opponent thinks you are cheating they might follow you in the bathroom and take pictures!

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:09 pm
by Nick Burrows
So we know that a handful of players cheat with phones in the toilet. Players are under no obligation to submit to being searched. Photographing someone in a cubicle is most likely illegal.

Why not arm all arbiters with one of those metal detecting wands as an essential piece of kit.

If the limit of a legal search is to find a phone on person, the penalty for doing so must be on a par to cheating.

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:47 pm
by Paul Cooksey
If you think making an accusation that a child cheated without proof is appropriate, probably better to do it on your own site than lumber Carl with the consequences.

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:51 pm
by JustinHorton
Nick Ivell wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 10:59 am
I'm more concerned with the apparent fact that a cheater has been caught, than the propriety of the methods used.
That's your privilege, but the posters who find the "methods" problematic may have good points to make, and if we don't think about them now, we may wish we had done so in the future.

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:58 pm
by Paul Cooksey
Paul McKeown wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:41 pm
Seriously, this is a great and shameful fall for such a well-known player. Very disheartening.
My feelings too. I was chatting with someone last weekend and said I was intending to post in defence of Rausis, since I did not think he was abusing the 400 point rule. I feel a bit of a fool for not making the connection to cheating sooner.

I don't believe there is a lot of cheating at master level. But I get why Keith and some of the other professional players are reacting with anger rather than sadness.

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:29 pm
by Dewi Jones
Matt Bridgeman wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 10:14 pm
xx

I'm glad that everyone has kissed and made up.

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:57 pm
by Ian Thompson
Roger de Coverly wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 10:57 pm
Stewart Reuben wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 10:51 pm
Mostly these chess cheating matters go to the FIDE Fair Play Commission. If they ban somebody, the player is entitled to take the commission to court. That is why they are so circumspect.
The reports appear to imply that he admitted the phone usage. Perhaps the photograph was posed after the detection. Some reports seem to be indicating that the phone was found in the cubicle immediately after Rausis had been in there.
Maybe, but I'm wondering why his left trouser leg is pulled up above his knee? An obvious possibility is that the phone was concealed on the lower part of his left leg, perhaps in the sock (or whatever it is) he's wearing that goes almost up to his knee.

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:27 am
by Roger de Coverly
Ian Thompson wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 11:57 pm

Maybe, but I'm wondering why his left trouser leg is pulled up above his knee? An obvious possibility is that the phone was concealed on the lower part of his left leg, perhaps in the sock (or whatever it is) he's wearing that goes almost up to his knee.
I suppose it would make sense to conceal the phone as carrying it in a pocket could leave him liable for instant default were it spotted during the game. Presumably the FIDE hit squad were observing play and how often he left the board.

There was that Irish case where an offended player took the law into his own hands by disturbing an opponent with a phone in a cubicle and got accused of assault for his trouble.

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2019 8:00 am
by Carl Hibbard
Paul Cooksey wrote:
Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:47 pm
If you think making an accusation that a child cheated without proof is appropriate, probably better to do it on your own site than lumber Carl with the consequences.
I return home and lots of posts seem to have now gone.

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2019 11:24 am
by IM Jack Rudd
I was at a party last night, and the Rausis case was the subject of much discussion. (As far as I know, I was the only active chess player at the party.)

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 10:30 am
by Chris Rice
The sequence of events widely reported by the media and in particular FIDE, in the Rausis incident, has been questioned by local French newspaper Dernières Nouvelles d'Alsace. The article says that it was the players who took it upon themselves to follow Rausis and take a picture in the bathroom. It was then reported to FIDE who then appeared to take all the credit for it.

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 11:54 am
by Roger de Coverly
Chris Rice wrote:
Tue Jul 16, 2019 10:30 am
The sequence of events widely reported by the media and in particular FIDE, in the Rausis incident, has been questioned by local French newspaper Dernières Nouvelles d'Alsace.
That does help to explain the photograph if it was taken by an anonymous player rather than by an arbiter.

Had FIDE not been officially involved, leaking the photograph would likely have damaged Rausis's reputation sufficiently to finish his career. That's added to the 200 point Elo gain and whatever the witchfinder program suggested on engine matching.

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:01 pm
by LawrenceCooper
Chris Rice wrote:
Tue Jul 16, 2019 10:30 am
The sequence of events widely reported by the media and in particular FIDE, in the Rausis incident, has been questioned by local French newspaper Dernières Nouvelles d'Alsace. The article says that it was the players who took it upon themselves to follow Rausis and take a picture in the bathroom. It was then reported to FIDE who then appeared to take all the credit for it.
Presumably players who had finished their games :?

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Posted: Tue Jul 16, 2019 7:10 pm
by Brian Towers
LawrenceCooper wrote:
Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:01 pm
Presumably players who had finished their games :?
Or a player with a dedicated digital camera. At my previous club there was one strong player (~2200) from another club who used to play in our FIDE tournaments who used to do just that and who, part way through a round, would take a few pictures for his club's website. He would then go back to finish his game. Didn't disturb anybody, didn't break any rules.