The Latest GM/IM Norm Scam

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi.

Suppose it is proved that player X was awarded his GM title illegally.
They strip player X of the GM title.

But before he was caught player X has played in a tournament(s) and him being there
knocked up the category allowing an honest player Y to get a GM norm.
Is player Y's GM norm rescinded?

and if so....
Player Y has since played in a tournament(s) him being there knocked up the category allowing Player Z to get his norm.
Is player Z's Norm rescinded?

And if so.....etc..etc.

Do player players Y and Z, though they had nothing to do with the original scam, lose their Norms or even their titles?
If player X had not fiddled his GM title players Y and Z would not have got their norm.
If players X (and there appears to be a few of them) have all the results of their
games expunged does this mean titles and norms are suspended or withdrawn.

No.
Because that would mean FIDE refunding title fees.

...er....I appear to have answered my own question....er....that's it.

No, I knew I had something else.

The Cup of Don. (I bet even the trophy is a fake. A cardboard replica.)

We need a book of the tournament. It will only have one game in it.
The exact same game won by 50 different players noted up 50 different ways.

Infact to get into the spirit of things CHESS/BCM could advertise such a book even though it does not exist.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

<snipping most>

FM (IA) Vladimir Afromeev (Russia) 2646 - yes really. He even has his own Wikipedia page. Alexander Baburin got particularly incensed about him a few years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Afromeev

Very much like the Ivanov case there is no proof that any of these allegations are true but as Stewart says they should at least have been treated as suspicious by FIDE. Let's hope the new FIDE anti-cheating committee can resolve these quickly as like Peter above I believe this is just scratching the surface and Prof Regan will uncover a lot more anomolies in due course.

The Afromeev one I remember. I had thought something happened about that, but it seems that someone losing a lawsuit over some of the allegations is all that has happened... These examples seem like something that really should have been looked into before now.

[Stewart Reuben]

A player gets the results for the GM title or for a higher rating. He is awarded that title or rating. Now he subsequently plays and a third party benefits.
The third party is innocent and cannot be penalised. The player and possibly arbiter are guilty. The QC possibly have been inadequately alert.

A Rumanian GM used to buy rating points cheaply in Eastern Europe and sell them at a premium in the West by throwing games or, at least, agreeing draws with weaker opponents.

[Geoff Chandler]

I did not think 3rd party players would be affected.

Just out of curiousity I went surfing for a precendent. I found none, but this was laughable.

http://www.auschess.org.au/columns/ct/ct160901.htm

After a farcical investigation, the World Chess Federation (FIDE) has stripped
Alexandru Crisan of his Grandmaster title and his top 50 world ranking.....

...Yet, faced with an open and shut case of corruption,
FIDE have managed to give Crisan multiple avenues for appeal.

The FIDE sub-committee considering the Crisan case sent Crisan's games from Slovenia to
Zurab Azmaiparashvili to analyse, and the Georgian GM returned with the correct conclusion that
Crisan was nowhere near GM (or IM) strength.

Unfortunately Azmaiparashvili happens to be the strongest player ever to be involved in major ratings fraud,
having entered the top 20 by gaining 50 points at a bogus tournament in Strumica, Macedonia in 1995.

The sub-committee failed to consider the Yugoslav games at all, and the process through which FIDE
stripped Crisan of his GM and IM titles and reduced his rating by more than 500 points may also be open
to challenge.

Crisan could also claim that he was only following the example of FIDE Vice-President Andrei Makarov,
who arranged an IM title for himself through non-existent tournaments in 1994.

Crisan I knew about but is any part of the rest true or have I stumbled upon an Australian version of 'Chandler Cornered.'

[shaunpress]

The link from auschess is a reprint of a newspaper column by GM Ian Rogers, and is a serious article.
As for the matters raised at the top of (and during) this thread, they have been drawn to the attention of the FIDE Qualifications Commission.
Such matters are outside the brief of the FIDE/ACP Anti-cheating Committee (of which I am a member), as we are only dealing with computer aided cheating at this time. This may of course change in the future if it is decided that the ACC should be expanded to cover other kinds of cheating (fixed tournaments, thrown games, sandbagging etc)

[Stewart Reuben]

Perfectly adequate notice was given of the Crisan case. Advance notice was given. It was debated properly in the Executive Board and Crisan was given ample opportunity to present his case, which he did, including attacking Azmay. Kirsan suggested that Makro play a match against Crisan and, if successful, Crisan would retain his title and rating. Makro would have none of that.
So it went to the vote and Crisan lost. The only major figures against this were Kirsan and Campo. There was nothing untoward, due process was followed. Crisan'a only recourse could have been to a court of law in Switzerland.
BUT later Kirsan reversed the decision. Nobody bothered to take the matter further.

[Arshad Ali]

A Rumanian GM used to buy rating points cheaply in Eastern Europe and sell them at a premium in the West by throwing games or, at least, agreeing draws with weaker opponents.

A case of (trading) arbitrage, if ever there was one.

[Geoff Chandler]

The trouble with such a grade selling ploy going on is that if a player
refused this Romanian lad's pre-game offer and beat him fairly then those
in the know may think the honest player had paid for the win.
So you have this fair and good player who in some minds is tainted.

It's a pity this Cheats Team is not casting it's net wider.
We have players who have put in a lot of time, effort and money (travelling expense, not bribes)
to get their IM/GM title.

Whilst others have rigged it and now claiming expenses, appearance fees and most likely
charging through the nose for GM lessons which could be of a sub-standard level.

[Chris Rice]

The trouble with such a grade selling ploy going on is that if a player
refused this Romanian lad's pre-game offer and beat him fairly then those
in the know may think the honest player had paid for the win.
So you have this fair and good player who in some minds is tainted.

It's a pity this Cheats Team is not casting it's net wider.
We have players who have put in a lot of time, effort and money (travelling expense, not bribes)
to get their IM/GM title.

Whilst others have rigged it and now claiming expenses, appearance fees and most likely
charging through the nose for GM lessons which could be of a sub-standard level.

Think you might be being a little pessimistic there Geoff. If you read Shaun Press's post above then its possible that the Anti-Cheating Committee's scope may well be extended to cover tournament rigging and match fixing etc and let's bear in mind that this thread emanated from some Sigma 13 research that Prof Regan is doing and he's on that Anti-Cheating Committee.

However, whether these matters are referred to the Anti-Cheating Committee or the Qualifications Committee or whoever the more important question is what Stewart touched upon and that is what will FIDE do about it or perhaps more accurately what can they do about it?

The problem is that when your evidence is all circumstantial and you have no physical evidence or 'smoking gun' then you are rightly subject to legal challenge. What FIDE could really do with is catching someone red handed in the act of paying someone off or seeing an email or a text that proves there was some arrangement for wrongdoing or maybe even where one of the wrongdoers has been stitched up over a deal and is disgruntled (say the opponent was paid to lose the game but didn't etc) and then using that person as a whistleblower (letting them off with a reduced ban etc) to catch the wider net (should there be one of course, where there isn't then its quite in order to fully bring whatever powers FIDE have to bear on the individual concerned).

On the list I gave yesterday there was a name missing which was another Russian IM player 2300+ strength who is pretty good by all accounts but allegedly sells his Elo points to the highest bidder. He's then good enough to go to other tournaments and get the points back and the cycle continues. How can FIDE do anything about that unless someone provides some evidence of overheard conversations or seeing money changing hands etc? In the absence of any hard evidence then whatever cock and bull story the player comes up with to explain it can't be countered.

Its all very difficult for FIDE and I think we can all appreciate that. However, on the positive side there are things that FIDE can do which they don't appear to be doing. What they can do is, when they are presented with compelling circumstantial evidence such as Prof Regan and others have come up, is arrange for the "persons of interest" concerned to be interviewed for their side of the story. FIDE don't have to do it themselves they can ask the National Federation who in the vast majority of cases would be happy to help I assume.

[Stewart Reuben]

The occasion when cheating was proven was due to the French CF themselves laying the complaint against their own players. FIDE have to rely very heavily on the federations.
Of course organisers don't have to invite players over whom a cloud hangs. That can be terribly unfair of course.

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi Chris

Not too pessimistic, that is why I wrote 'which could be' when I said:

"...for GM lessons which could be of a sub-standard level."

There are no doubt some very good players who have been caught up in this.

But you are right.

Taking my holier than thou stance I have no idea of the full picture.
It is easy to pre-judge sitting here safe and well fed in a nice house and being financially secure.
Some of these lads for political, personal or severe finacial reason may have taken
this path out of a nesessacity I simply cannot imagine.

I am/was curious just how deep this goes.
It may explain some of the more puzzling 'blunders' I've seen in some GM/IM games.
I've used every reason for a player blundering that you can think of. (and some you have never heard of.)
There is a class of player that expect to blunder and are only to glad to get it out of the way.

I've not yet used: 'He played this because he was paid to lose.' but that day may come.

[Stewart Reuben]

You seem to have overlooked the possibility that a player misread the recommended move on his illegal computer screen.

In a tournament with zero tolerance, a player wants to throw the game, but not lose rating points. So he turns up one second late.

A rated player is playing an unrated player in a Swiss. So he throws the game. The unrated player secures a higher initial rating and the rating of the rated player is unaffected. Later in his career he meets the rated player and throws the game. Both players have higher ratings.

Title norms are often gained because the player gives the norm-seeker a draw in the last round.

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi Stewart.

A player leaving his mobile on and getting a friend to call him. etc...

These are reasons and methods of deliberately throwing games.

I've always been more interested in the how and why players make a genune blunder.
It is a very important part pf the game. No blunder/mistake no win.

"Not leaving his computer on long enough to fully analyse a position." is a 21st century excuse/reason

I'm on safe ground with under 2000 players games as there are no titles or vast sums
of money at stake.
Over that and in the 2400+ field then they may be something more going on than a simple game of Chess.
I have enough trouble trying to figure out what is going in their minds without
having to check previous results, norm standings and their bank statements.

I don't think I can get away with:

"Two days after losing this game Brown was sporting a brand new pair of £100 sneakers.
This explains him missing the mate in two and dropping his Queen."

"He beat Smith back in 1992 when he was ungraded, this blunder by Jones is him returning the grading points."

(I wonder how many bogus or rigged games have sneaked their way into opening theory?)

"Title norms are often gained because the player gives the norm-seeker a draw in the last round."
Is yet another argument against the titles via norms system.

Personally I'd love to play someone needing just a ½ point for a norm.
You have the draw in your back pocket before a pawn is pushed.
I'd sac the house, the street, the entire neighbourhood and then offer a draw.

[John Hickman]

"Two days after losing this game Brown was sporting a brand new pair of £100 sneakers.
This explains him missing the mate in two and dropping his Queen.".

Is the Fédération internationale des blagues still persuing Geoff for some jokes be bought off a Grandjester in the nineties to increase his FUNY rating?

[Chris Rice]

(I wonder how many bogus or rigged games have sneaked their way into opening theory?)

Well there was this one Geoff....

http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.a ... troff.html