FIDE's 400pt rule

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
Paolo Casaschi
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:46 am

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by Paolo Casaschi » Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:31 pm

Thomas Rendle wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 8:51 am
The story is here: https://chess24.com/en/read/news/gm-igo ... t-cheating

I've also been following for a while and players have been extremely skeptical of his results. As has been pointed out it's tough for even a GM to consistently beat these 2200/2300 players.
Is there any other player that you are currently following with similar skepticism?
I mean someone that has not been caught yet...

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 6460
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by JustinHorton » Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:36 pm

How wise would it be for anyone to answer that?
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Chris Rice
Posts: 2776
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by Chris Rice » Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:40 pm

Paolo Casaschi wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:31 pm
Thomas Rendle wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 8:51 am
The story is here: https://chess24.com/en/read/news/gm-igo ... t-cheating

I've also been following for a while and players have been extremely skeptical of his results. As has been pointed out it's tough for even a GM to consistently beat these 2200/2300 players.
Is there any other player that you are currently following with similar skepticism?
I mean someone that has not been caught yet...
Don't know about Tom and I'm not making accusations but Mexican IM Aldama Degurnay, Dionisio is certainly a person of interest for me.

Paul McKeown
Posts: 3255
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:01 pm
Location: Hayes (Middx)
Contact:

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by Paul McKeown » Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:41 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 7:44 am
Rausis was caught cheating by Laurent Freyd at a tournament in Strasbourg yesterday. It involved a phone in a toilet. There has been triumphant posting on Facebook about the result by Emil Sutovsky and Yuri Garrett. It seems as though Rausis had been on the radar for this for a while, without ever being caught.
I guess the Baltic Defence is busted, after all.

Seriously, this is a great and shameful fall for such a well-known player. Very disheartening.

User avatar
Paolo Casaschi
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:46 am

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by Paolo Casaschi » Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:05 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:36 pm
How wise would it be for anyone to answer that?
It would be wise to understand how many players are "being followed with skepticism for quite a while" compared with how many of them are actually caught.

It's still up for debate which is more widespread, either the cheating or the players paranoia about cheating; the above information would help clarify that; after all, according to Yuri Garret from the ACP and the FIDE anti-cheating team "the guy didn’t stand a chance from the moment I knew about the incident", so if you are cheating and you are on the "watch list" you'll be eventually caught.

I was discussing about this with a very good friend, unrated OTB but very good at blitz. I've known him for a very long time and I have no doubts he's not cheating while playing online blitz; however his blitz skills and playing style make him a target of the online anti-cheating systems and of his opponents paranoia; for example, I've seen him trashing opponents well above 2000 rating points on chess.com with the Halloween gambit (e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Nc3 Nf6 Nxe5); regularly one of his opponents complains about him, the admins have a conversation with him, then later another opponent complains and his account is eventually banned; another account is created, rinse and repeat.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 6460
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by JustinHorton » Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:23 pm

Paolo Casaschi wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:05 pm
JustinHorton wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:36 pm
How wise would it be for anyone to answer that?
It would be wise to understand how many players are "being followed with skepticism for quite a while" compared with how many of them are actually caught.
Sure, I grasp that, but I don't grasp how we intend to deal with the potential legal consequences of saying "we suspect that X, Y and Z are cheats".
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Thomas Rendle
Posts: 325
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 8:31 am

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by Thomas Rendle » Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:35 pm

Paolo Casaschi wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:31 pm
Thomas Rendle wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 8:51 am
The story is here: https://chess24.com/en/read/news/gm-igo ... t-cheating

I've also been following for a while and players have been extremely skeptical of his results. As has been pointed out it's tough for even a GM to consistently beat these 2200/2300 players.
Is there any other player that you are currently following with similar skepticism?
I mean someone that has not been caught yet...
He was certainly top of a very, very short list, and certainly the only one I would've said was (in this case much) more likely than not. Also the only titled player.

At least this is the case for computer cheating, which I continue to feel is actually rarer than people suspect. On the other hand I think we should be more worried about players intentionally losing points (sandbagging) to enter lower rated events.

Mick Norris
Posts: 7507
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by Mick Norris » Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:43 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:23 pm
Paolo Casaschi wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:05 pm
JustinHorton wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:36 pm
How wise would it be for anyone to answer that?
It would be wise to understand how many players are "being followed with skepticism for quite a while" compared with how many of them are actually caught.
Sure, I grasp that, but I don't grasp how we intend to deal with the potential legal consequences of saying "we suspect that X, Y and Z are cheats".
I think for Carl's sake we don't name, or say anything to potentially identify X, Y or Z

Answering Paolo's question with numbers, not names would be ok I think e.g. 25 players being followed, 3 caught (numbers chosen at random by me)
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 2968
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:46 pm

"according to Yuri Garret from the ACP and the FIDE anti-cheating team "the guy didn’t stand a chance from the moment I knew about the incident","

Let's be grateful we have such a genius in control.

NickFaulks
Posts: 5088
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by NickFaulks » Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:51 pm

Thomas Rendle wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:35 pm
On the other hand I think we should be more worried about players intentionally losing points (sandbagging) to enter lower rated events.
That problem isn't hard to stop, or at least mitigate. You specify that the rating taken in account will be the highest registered in the past year, or perhaps a bit longer. I have never understood why organisers whose tournaments are routinely targeted by sandbaggers refuse to do this.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 18102
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by Roger de Coverly » Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:04 pm

Paolo Casaschi wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:05 pm
so if you are cheating and you are on the "watch list" you'll be eventually caught.
It was the straight forward approach of consulting a third party about the game in progress, in this case software on a phone. As you have to leave the board to do this, it's physically noticeable. You wonder how often or at all he took advice when playing those rated 400 points or more beneath him. Perhaps only if the opening,the tactics or ending assessment were particularly difficult to solve for an ageing player of GM standard. Witchfinder programs may find that form of occasional cheating difficult to detect.

User avatar
Joey Stewart
Posts: 1084
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 2:35 pm
Location: All Of Them
Contact:

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by Joey Stewart » Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:14 pm

NickFaulks wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:51 pm
Thomas Rendle wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:35 pm
On the other hand I think we should be more worried about players intentionally losing points (sandbagging) to enter lower rated events.
That problem isn't hard to stop, or at least mitigate. You specify that the rating taken in account will be the highest registered in the past year, or perhaps a bit longer. I have never understood why organisers whose tournaments are routinely targeted by sandbaggers refuse to do this.
Id speculate it is something along the lines of most tournament organisers put on their event near single handedly, usually breaking even or even running at a loss (it cant be easy these days with all the overheads) so the idea of having to data analyse every single entrant is kind of going beyond reasonable expectations
Lose one queen and it is a disaster, Lose 1000 queens and it is just a statistic.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 6460
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by JustinHorton » Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:22 pm

Mick Norris wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:43 pm
JustinHorton wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:23 pm
Paolo Casaschi wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:05 pm

It would be wise to understand how many players are "being followed with skepticism for quite a while" compared with how many of them are actually caught.
Sure, I grasp that, but I don't grasp how we intend to deal with the potential legal consequences of saying "we suspect that X, Y and Z are cheats".
I think for Carl's sake we don't name, or say anything to potentially identify X, Y or Z
Well you would think not
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

NickFaulks
Posts: 5088
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: FIDE's 400pt rule

Post by NickFaulks » Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:36 pm

Joey Stewart wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:14 pm
so the idea of having to data analyse every single entrant is kind of going beyond reasonable expectations
That won't wash. You have to go to the FIDE card of every player anyway, and from there it is a single click to their rating history chart and a quick glance to confirm that the information they have provided is true.


Post Reply