French Chess Federation investigates cheating players

[Simon Louchart]

The debate, if there is one, seems to involve the finer points of the French approach to revenue and expense recognition when applied to a sports body with both membership and sponsorship income.

Perhaps if he is banned, Feller is looking forward to a fresh career as a chartered accountant.

Indeed, I am not an accountant myself, but the website Europe-echecs asked an expert to assess Sebastien Feller's accusations, and the conclusion is (approximately):
"According to documents submitted to our accounting expert, it thus appears that the accusations of Sebastien Feller are false . His accusations of financial delicts in the management of the FFE are based on a complete misunderstanding of basic concepts of accounting."

which is pretty much closing the case (at least for me)

[Jonathan Bryant]

Indeed, I am not an accountant myself, but the website Europe-echecs asked an expert to assess Sebastien Feller's accusations, and the conclusion is ...

which is pretty much closing the case (at least for me)

And I am not a lawyer, but surely replying "well you committed fraud" is not actually a defence to an accusation of cheating at chess by illicit use of computers and it still isn't even if the accuser did actually commit fraud.

Or am I missing something?

[David Sedgwick]

And I am not a lawyer, but surely replying "well you committed fraud" is not actually a defence to an accusation of cheating at chess by illicit use of computers and it still isn't even if the accuser did actually commit fraud.

Or am I missing something?

The suggestion, surely, is that Feller was framed because he was a whistleblower.

[Roger de Coverly]

The suggestion, surely, is that Feller was framed because he was a whistleblower.

The problem with that theory is that the two principal framers would have been the alleged co-conspirators. It doesn't seem to have been Feller's defence that he always handed his phone to the match captain whilst in play. Therefore he wouldn't have any knowledge of what text messages may have been sent and was concentrating on his own games far too much to be aware of any spectating patterns by his match captain.

[Jonathan Bryant]

And I am not a lawyer, but surely replying "well you committed fraud" is not actually a defence to an accusation of cheating at chess by illicit use of computers and it still isn't even if the accuser did actually commit fraud.

Or am I missing something?

The suggestion, surely, is that Feller was framed because he was a whistleblower.

Well that would make sense David, but wouldn't it have come up before now? If memory serves, wasn't the original defence that he was being victimised because he was pro Kirsan when the French authorities were Anti? Or was that one of the others?

[David Sedgwick]

And I am not a lawyer, but surely replying "well you committed fraud" is not actually a defence to an accusation of cheating at chess by illicit use of computers and it still isn't even if the accuser did actually commit fraud.

Or am I missing something?

The suggestion, surely, is that Feller was framed because he was a whistleblower.

Well that would make sense David, but wouldn't it have come up before now? If memory serves, wasn't the original defence that he was being victimised because he was pro Kirsan when the French authorities were Anti? Or was that one of the others?

No, the Kirsan point was Feller as well.

The financial issue did come up some time ago. It just took longer than usual to reach this Forum.

Prior to or shortly after the whole matter becoming public, Feller and/or his supporters contended that he was being victimised for some or all of the following three reasons (and possibly others that I haven't picked up):

1. That he was pro Ilyumzhinov whereas the FFE (French Chess Federation) was supporting Karpov.
2. That he had exposed alleged financial irregularities within the FFE.
3. That one of his principle accusers, FFE Vice-President Joanna Pomian, harboured a grudge against him because a few years ago he had been selected to represent France at a number of Junior events in preference to her son.

As you've pointed out, he would still have a case to answer even if all three of these allegations were true.

[John Wright]

Now even the Computers are cheating;

http://www.chessvibes.com/reports/rybka ... pionships/

[Roger de Coverly]

Now even the Computers are cheating;

Humans are helping them by allegedly copying code from one engine to another.

[Leonard Barden]

From Susan Polgar's blog.....

There is a continuation of “Feller’s case”. Yesterday Versailles trial court suspended the decision of the French Chess Federation (FCF) about disqualification of Sebastien Feller and Arnaud Hauchard due to procedural infractions on the side of the federation.

These two chess-players are allowed to play again till the final verdict is delivered. Interestingly enough, this decision doesn’t apply to Cyril Marzolo, the third person involved in the case, since he didn’t file an appeal.

Feller and Hauchard are expected to play in the French Championship which is to be held in August in Caen.

According to the comments by the French chess website Europe-Echecs, in the nearest future there is a possibility of absolutely unexpected course of events, notably, parties can reach the out-of-court settlement.

It will be recalled that in March this year the FCF Disciplinary Committee found Sebastien Feller, Arnaud Hauchard, and Cyril Marzolo guilty of violation of ethical norms at the last Olimpics in Khanty-Mansiysk.

Source: whychess.org

[Roger de Coverly]

Reported here as well http://www.europe-echecs.com/actualites ... -3428.html