Chess fraud in New Zealand

The very latest International round up of English news.
Simon Spivack
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Simon Spivack » Tue Mar 08, 2011 10:30 am

Adam Ashton wrote:To comment on the original issue I'm afraid that for once I completely agree with Mr Giddens. I'm astonished at the amused/light tone a lot of people seem to have taken. The amount of money is not relevant it was simply blatant cheating.

As for "actually .. i just wanted to play chess without media or any "special treatment". Just be a normal chessplayer not a wgm .."

Never heard such crap in my life. Lifetime ban if you ask me. Ok it might not bother her very much since she seems to have largely quit anyway. Still it's the principle!
"Giddins", not "Giddens".

Why are pundits, like early modern witch hunters, targeting the girl more than her father?

Can one expect similar vociferousness on these fora when the target is worthwhile, say (plucking an example out of thin air) RD Kobe?

Jon D'Souza-Eva

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Jon D'Souza-Eva » Tue Mar 08, 2011 11:14 am

I've finally worked out the meaning of "R D Kobe". I knew it was a reference to Ray Keene, but even with that clue it took me nigh on half an hour. I'm glad I don't do crosswords.

Adam Ashton
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Adam Ashton » Tue Mar 08, 2011 12:07 pm

I believe the girl is significantly stronger than her father which is why she has recieved most of the attention. If the Father's rating exceeds the tournament limits then obviously the same applies to him also.

Simon Spivack
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Simon Spivack » Tue Mar 08, 2011 1:39 pm

Adam Ashton wrote:I believe the girl is significantly stronger than her father ...
According to http://ratings.fide.com/seek.phtml?idco ... k&offset=0 their grades are 2346 and 2275 with the daughter on an upwards trajectory before she stopped playing in FIDE rated contests.
Adam Ashton wrote:... which is why she has recieved most of the attention
She is rather more photogenic: were the grades reversed, I very much doubt that the coverage and commentary would have been significantly different. The opprobrium should mostly be directed at the more culpable of the two allies: probably the father.

What remains unanswered is why this should be considered more censurable by some than the greater antics of the chess world's more colourful characters.

Alan Walton
Posts: 1318
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Alan Walton » Tue Mar 08, 2011 1:51 pm

Simon Spivack wrote:She is rather more photogenic: were the grades reversed, I very much doubt that the coverage and commentary would have been significantly different. The opprobrium should mostly be directed at the more culpable of the two allies: probably the father.
Why would you assume the father is more culpable, is this because he is the father or because she female, personally this woman is nearly turning 20, so I assume she knew exactly what she was doing and is as equally culpable as her father in this matter

Simon Spivack
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Simon Spivack » Tue Mar 08, 2011 3:24 pm

Alan's answer does not address the first sentence of what he has quoted from me. It would have been better to have excised it.
Alan Walton wrote:
Simon Spivack wrote:She is rather more photogenic: were the grades reversed, I very much doubt that the coverage and commentary would have been significantly different. The opprobrium should mostly be directed at the more culpable of the two allies: probably the father.
Why would you assume the father is more culpable, ...
I have done no such thing.

My premise is that it is likely that the father is more culpable. I am not asserting, or assuming, that he is. However, if he is deserving of greater blame, then the attacks should be more directed at him than his daughter. Conversely, should it be established that the daughter is the stronger character, then the blame should primarily head her way.

We do not know whether the two of them came to the same decision at the same time, or one led the other. However, a common assumption is that the parent would take the lead in the situation described, unless the parent is feeble-minded (improbable for someone who plays chess at above 2200 FIDE level) or far older than fifty odd years. Often there is a situation of economic dependency between a child aged twenty and a parent aged fifty. In Germany, as I understand it, it is normal for university education to stretch out for longer than in the UK. Many decisions will effectively be made by the parent on behalf of the young adult.
Alan Walton wrote:... equally culpable as her father ...
If one assumes they are both equally responsible, then why target mainly the girl? One explanation, given in a previous message, which I find utterly unconvincing, is that it is because of her higher grade. The other I have already provided.

The silence is deafening when it comes to my suggestion that this affair doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Why is it worthy of greater vituperativeness than the picaresque shows of certain other individuals?

User avatar
Adam Raoof
Posts: 2577
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:16 pm
Location: NW4 4UY
Contact:

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Adam Raoof » Tue Mar 08, 2011 3:44 pm

The situation to me is clear.

Two players fraudulently misrepresented their identity in order to participate in a series of events around the Antipodes, whether for financial gain or just to boost their egos. Their presence in the events did not lend any prestige to those events, and made the organisers and the players feel embarrassed and angry by the deception. They deprived others of trophies and cash prizes. I don't see it as a joke. I read that they had both pretty much retired from tournament chess, and if that wasn't the case before, then in effect they have made it certain now.

The irony is they could have made much more money by being honest and just offering to do a tandem simul around the country at local clubs, who might have been happy to pay more than the prize money that they won.
Adam Raoof IA, IO
The Chess Circuit - https://chesscircuit.substack.com/
Tornelo - https://tornelo.com/chess/orgs/chess-england
Simon Williams "The Ginger GM" - https://gingergm.com/ref/106.html
Don’t stop playing chess!

User avatar
Gareth Harley-Yeo
Posts: 307
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:58 pm
Location: Wales
Contact:

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Gareth Harley-Yeo » Tue Mar 08, 2011 3:57 pm

I'd say the girl is getting more of the attention as she's the one I asked outright. She's since responded, informing methat she's read this forum so I see little point in me also asking her father for his take on the matter.

Alan Walton
Posts: 1318
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Alan Walton » Tue Mar 08, 2011 3:59 pm

Gareth Harley-Yeo wrote:I'd say the girl is getting more of the attention as she's the one I asked outright. She's since responded, informing methat she's read this forum so I see little point in me also asking her father for his take on the matter.
Gareth, have you got the link with her response?

Justin Hadi

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Justin Hadi » Tue Mar 08, 2011 4:05 pm

Do you ban people who cheat at Golders Green, Adam?

User avatar
Gavin Strachan
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 10:06 am
Contact:

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Gavin Strachan » Tue Mar 08, 2011 5:23 pm

No he puts them in the open though they think they are playing in lower sections :cry:

Simon Spivack
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Simon Spivack » Tue Mar 08, 2011 5:50 pm

Gareth Harley-Yeo wrote:I'd say the girl is getting more of the attention as she's the one I asked outright.
Gareth's post can be found on page two of this thread. It is dated 5th March. The two blog entries that I can think of are dated 3rd March and the following day. It seems implausible that what Gareth wrote on these fora had any bearing on the blog jottings.

The original article and some of the germane comments on Chess Vibes are dated 3rd March. Again, it is not obvious to me that what Gareth has written has any bearing on those messages.

Sunbase chose a photo of the girl in shorts, before Gareth's post, there were other pictures that could have been preferred.

The very public humiliation that both father and daughter have suffered strikes me as a more than sufficient penalty for the transgression.

Adam Ashton
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Adam Ashton » Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:49 pm

Didn't realise the father was a 2200+ player as well, I stand corrected on that point. I agree he should be treated exactly the same and the chessbase article was unfairly focused on her. Still that isn't any kind of defense for her is it? Just means that her father should be included too.

As for the deafening silence on your other point well in essence you seemed to be saying that 'it's not a big deal because people get away with worse', which isn't really much of an argument. Yes there are bigger fish to fry but that doesn't make their actions any more acceptable. Deceiving people for monetary gain(however slight) is pretty serious in my view.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 7527
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:56 pm

Adam Ashton wrote:Didn't realise the father was a 2200+ player as well, I stand corrected on that point. I agree he should be treated exactly the same and the chessbase article was unfairly focused on her. Still that isn't any kind of defense for her is it? Just means that her father should be included too.
Chessbase (the website) does seem to focus on female chess players quite a lot (and photoshoots of them). Particularly the more attractive ones. I've never managed to work out whether they are doing their bit to raise the profile of women's chess, or whether they are catering to the interests of the majority of their readers. Maybe a bit of both.

AustinElliott
Posts: 651
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 11:01 pm
Location: North of England
Contact:

Re: Chess fraud in New Zealand

Post by AustinElliott » Tue Mar 08, 2011 9:07 pm

An alternative interpretation to put on their actions, which could chime with some of the facts, would be that they were considering re-locating Downunder and decided to tour around incognito and see what the Australasian chess scene was like.

This would be consistent with various snippets you can find on the net, such as that Lara S plays for Croatia (not Germany, which presumably she would be equally entitled to play for), and that there are reported to have been "dramas" between the dad and the German chess establishment. Also that Lara S seems to have quit playing competitively - which speaks to someone losing interest in the game, for whatever reason, of which "attendant baggage" could be one. On one blog (dealing with a club they visited giving their real names) the dad is reported as saying "I suppose in Australian chess there are no politics".

If you read it this way you could PERHAPS understand the "incognito", though it seems distinctly ill-judged. And though the CASH prizes are reported as being minimal, I think they would have come out of it less badly if they had handed them back, or said "give it to the best-performing local junior, we're on holiday".

What they did was clearly ill-judged and deceptive. but ultimately the question of precisely what punishment might be appropriate hangs rather on their MOTIVE for doing this (i.e. deception for financial gain or something less culpable).

Post Reply