Chess Player Strip Searched

The very latest International round up of English news.
Steve Collyer
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2008 8:07 am

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by Steve Collyer » Sun Jan 27, 2013 7:32 pm

Leonard Barden wrote: ...the suggestion is that the live feed stopped in round 8 at move 15, and before that Ivanov's moves correlated closely with Houdini, while from move 16 onwards they only correlated in the case of forced moves and captures.

I was hoping that Steve Collyer would answer that, but so far he hasn't.
Leonard.
Below is the full Batch Analyzer output for this game.
To understand the analysis is very easy.
Take the line 11... 0-0 { Bf5 -5 20 : 0-0 -5 20 : Rc8 0 20 : Qb6 0 19 }
On move 11 Black played 0-0. Houdini's 1st choice move was, however, 11...Bf5, scoring -5 at a depth of 20 ply. The player move is highlighted in bold, also scoring -5 at 20 ply. Houdini's 3rd choice was 11...Rc8 which scored 0 at 20 ply, and the engine's 4th choice move was ...Qb6, also scoring 0 but when analysis finished for that move the depth reached was 19.

[Event "19th Open A"]
[Site "Zadar"]
[Date "2012.12.21"]
[Round "8.1"]
[White "Borislav Ivanov"]
[Black "Borki Predojevic"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D11"]
[WhiteElo "2227"]
[BlackElo "2600"]
[PlyCount "68"]
[Analysis "Houdini 1.5a x64 Hash:256 Time:30s Max Depth:20ply"]

{ Book Moves: }

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Qc2 dxc4 5. Qxc4 Bg4 6. Ne5 Be6 7. Qd3 Nbd7

{ Analyzed: }

8. Nf3 { Nf3 5 20 : f4 -13 20 : Nxd7 -20 19 : Nc3 -23 19 }
8... Bg4 { Bg4 6 19 : Qc7 7 19 : Qb6 9 19 : Nb6 11 19 }

9. Nc3 { Nc3 7 18 : Bd2 -7 18 : h3 -8 18 : Bf4 -13 18 }
9... e6 { Qb6 1 19 : Qc7 1 19 : Qa5 7 19 : e6 10 18 }

10. g3 { e4 8 19 : h3 3 19 : Bf4 -1 18 : a3 -5 18 }
10... Be7 { Be7 -7 19 : h6 -4 19 : Bd6 -2 19 : Bb4 0 19 }

11. Bg2 { Bg2 -2 19 : h3 -10 19 : Qc2 -17 19 : a4 -17 19 }
11... 0-0 { Bf5 -5 20 : 0-0 -5 20 : Rc8 0 20 : Qb6 0 19 }

12. 0-0 { 0-0 -6 20 : Qc2 -22 20 : Qd2 -16 19 : Bf4 -17 19 }
12... Rc8 { Bf5 -8 18 : Qb6 2 17 : Bh5 4 17 : Rc8 12 17 }

13. Rd1 { Rd1 5 19 : Re1 0 18 : Qc2 0 18 : e4 -2 18 }
13... Qa5 { h6 8 20 : Bh5 8 19 : Nd5 13 19 : Qa5 16 19 }

14. Bd2 { h3 16 18 : Bd2 11 18 : Bf4 0 18 : Rb1 0 17 }
14... Rfd8 { h6 13 19 : Qb6 15 19 : Rcd8 21 19 : Bh5 17 18 }

15. h3 { h3 18 18 : Nh4 -2 18 : Rac1 -10 18 : Qc2 -11 18 }
15... Bh5 { Bh5 5 19 : Bxf3 25 19 : Bf5 47 18 : Nc5 222 18 }

16. Qc4 { e4 15 19 : g4 13 19 : a3 -1 19 : Rac1 0 18 }
16... b5 { b5 -22 18 : Qb6 -9 18 : Bg6 -8 18 : h6 -5 18 }

17. Qb3 { Qd3 -27 20 : Qb3 -39 20 : b4 -72 20 : Nd5 -199 20 }
17... Qb6 { b4 -31 19 : Qb6 -16 19 : Qa6 -15 19 : Qc7 10 18 }

18. g4 { Rac1 -20 19 : Bg5 -20 19 : a3 -21 19 : Bf4 -27 19 }
18... Bg6 { Bg6 -20 18 : Nxg4 155 18 : Bxg4 160 17 : e5 225 17 }

19. Bf4 { g5 -24 20 : a3 -28 19 : Bf4 -31 19 : Nh4 -32 19 }
19... a5 { h6 -22 20 : b4 -21 20 : a5 -21 20 : Nd5 -20 20 }

20. a3 { Nh4 -19 20 : a3 -36 20 : Ne5 -42 20 : Rdc1 -44 20 }
20... a4 { a4 -37 20 : Qa6 -27 20 : h6 -29 19 : Nd5 -21 19 }

21. Qa2 { Qa2 -38 19 : Nxa4 -288 19 : Bc7 -547 18 : Bd6 -852 18 }
21... Bc2 { Nd5 -43 20 : h5 -37 20 : c5 -33 20 : Bc2 -31 19 }

22. Rd2 { Rdc1 -36 20 : Rd2 -48 19 : Re1 -49 19 : Rf1 -59 19 }
22... Bb3 { Bb3 -54 20 : Nd5 -32 19 : Bg6 -28 19 : Be4 -8 19 }

23. Qb1 { Qb1 -52 20 : Nxa4 -444 20 : Bc7 -562 19 : g5 -607 19 }
23... c5 { Nd5 -52 19 : c5 -39 19 : h5 -37 19 : h6 -32 19 }

24. e3 { e4 -28 18 : Qe1 -37 18 : Be3 -40 18 : e3 -47 18 }
24... b4 { Nd5 -49 19 : h6 -38 18 : h5 -35 18 : Bc4 -32 18 }

25. axb4 { axb4 0 19 : dxc5 -55 19 : Ne2 -85 18 : Ne4 -108 18 }
25... Qxb4 { Qxb4 0 19 : cxb4 2 19 : c4 32 19 : cxd4 34 19 }

26. Ne5 { dxc5 0 18 : Bg5 -10 18 : e4 -24 18 : Na2 -25 18 }
26... Nxe5 { Nxe5 -76 18 : g5 -33 18 : Nd5 -20 17 : Qb6 45 17 }

27. Bxe5 { Bxe5 -76 18 : g5 -584 18 : Bh2 -571 17 : Re2 -572 17 }
27... Nd7 { Nd7 -94 19 : cxd4 -75 19 : Qa5 -49 18 : h5 -39 18 }

28. Bg3 { Qe1 -95 20 : Bh2 -104 20 : Bf4 -99 19 : Bg3 -101 19 }
28... Nb6 { Nb6 -104 18 : Nf6 -66 18 : h5 -33 18 : h6 -25 17 }

29. Qe4 { Bf4 -103 19 : Re2 -126 19 : Be5 -119 18 : Be4 -128 18 }
29... Nc4 { Nc4 -302 20 : a3 -155 20 : Qa5 -104 19 : cxd4 -78 19 }

30. Re2 { Re2 -299 18 : Rdd1 -510 18 : Qd3 -628 18 : Rd3 -655 18 }
30... cxd4 { cxd4 -312 19 : Nxb2 -206 18 : Bf6 -140 18 : Rd7 -120 18 }

31. exd4 { exd4 -316 18 : Na2 -621 18 : Nxa4 -655 17 : Qb7 -749 17 }
31... Nxb2 { Nxb2 -320 20 : a3 -247 19 : Rd7 -126 19 : Bf8 -123 19 }

32. Rxb2 { Na2 -319 19 : Nb5 -322 19 : Rxb2 -347 19 : Qb7 -414 19 }
32... Qxc3 { Qxc3 -357 19 : Rxc3 -322 19 : Rxd4 -164 19 : a3 -141 18 }

33. Qe2 { Qe2 -358 19 : Rab1 -550 19 : Rbb1 -551 19 : Qb1 -638 19 }
33... Qxd4 { a3 -363 20 : Qxd4 -359 19 : Bc4 -332 19 : Bf6 -310 19 }

34. Be5 { Rbb1 -364 20 : Be5 -384 19 : Rab1 -436 19 : Re1 -469 19 }
34... Qd3 { Qc4 -383 18 : Qb4 -375 18 : Qc5 -331 18 : Qd3 -314 18 }


0-1

{ Game Summary }

{ White: Borislav Ivanov }
{ Top 1 Match: 13/27 ( 48.1% )
{ Top 2 Match: 18/27 ( 66.7% )
{ Top 3 Match: 20/27 ( 74.1% )
{ Top 4 Match: 22/27 ( 81.5% )

{ Black: Borki Predojevic }
{ Top 1 Match: 15/27 ( 55.6% )
{ Top 2 Match: 19/27 ( 70.4% )
{ Top 3 Match: 20/27 ( 74.1% )
{ Top 4 Match: 25/27 ( 92.6% )

Leonard Barden
Posts: 1857
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 11:21 am

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by Leonard Barden » Sun Jan 27, 2013 8:23 pm

Thanks, Steve; I understand.

Ivanov says he will play in the Bulgarian Open at Plovdiv which starts 3 February, so that should be informative.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:12 am

The moves from 8 to 15 aren't especially difficult to find. You could play them without thought in a blitz game.

Chris Rice
Posts: 3418
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by Chris Rice » Sun Feb 03, 2013 5:48 am

More accusations and examples of cheating in another ChessBase article

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8818

This problem isn't going to go away and needs to be addressed with some urgency before chess tournaments get to be a complete joke. The idea of the ACP or FIDE setting up some sort of working party/committee to come up with measures to combat this seems sensible.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Feb 03, 2013 7:54 am

Chris Rice wrote:More accusations and examples of cheating in another ChessBase article
On the evidence made public, the Italian case appears to be somewhat flimsy. The only hard evidence is that he had a communications device, namely an earpiece, in his possession during one of the games. Whilst there are glasses available with build in video recording facilities and perhaps real time transmission as well, he claims the "special" glasses were just commercially available reading glasses with built in mini torches. No evidence seems to have been offered as to the necessary accomplice. Also missing is the "your moves are the same as Houdini" witch hunt, seen in other accusations.

What might be called "casual" cheating, that is consulting a device for the odd move when away from the board, is dangerously easy, but is it any more frequent than discussing the game with a stronger player? In over the board play, systematic cheating, using the engine for nearly every move has to be more difficult, as it could involve setting yourself up with obscure gadgets and possibly involving an accomplice to actually transmit the suggested moves.

Chris Rice
Posts: 3418
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by Chris Rice » Sun Feb 03, 2013 9:28 am

RdC - "On the evidence made public, the Italian case appears to be somewhat flimsy. The only hard evidence is that he had a communications device, namely an earpiece, in his possession during one of the games."

So you're ignoring the "hard evidence" then? It's like saying that the evidence against a cyclist is flimsy simply because he has a fridge full of EPO. ie why would he require it if he wasn't going to use it?
Not sure where you're going with the "casual cheating" argument either. Discussing moves with a stronger player is cheating. Consulting a device is cheating.
Cheating is becoming more and more of a problem yet you seem to want a burden of proof that is excessive and unecessary.
Perhaps its hard to come to terms with the fact that these days you may be playing someone who is cheating using a computer but burying your head in the sand and pretending its not really happening isn't going to fix the problem. That having been said, as you seem by your own admission, to have the ability to produce eight top choice Houdini moves in a row, in a blitz game, without any thought, perhaps the issue doesn't affect you as much as the rest of us. :lol:

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4819
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:53 pm

Chris Rice wrote:That having been said, as you seem by your own admission, to have the ability to produce eight top choice Houdini moves in a row, in a blitz game, without any thought, perhaps the issue doesn't affect you as much as the rest of us. :lol:
If I played sufficiently many blitz games, I'd expect to find a few where I'd played eight top choice Houdini moves in a row. That's just the natural course of events where two good players look at the same position and pick a move: there should be a large proportion of matches. If you're using match-ups with a computer to check for cheating, you either need large samples (which is what the correspondence guys work on) or some suspicious circumstance that makes it more likely that a computer is being used.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Feb 03, 2013 3:39 pm

Chris Rice wrote: Cheating is becoming more and more of a problem yet you seem to want a burden of proof that is excessive and unecessary.
You need to be very careful with that statement. Are you making the accusation that Over the Board players in Congresses, 4NCL, county matches , evening league matches are cheating? If so, then you need to demonstrate how they are breaking the long standing prohibition against seeking external assistance during the game. The approaches of consulting a friend with a computer in the foyer or retiring to the cubicles with a Smartphone are quite obviously illegal and what I meant by "casual" cheating. The approach of using concealed devices either directly to suggest moves or indirectly to have a hidden collaborator requires rather more sophistication. Is anyone that bothered even for a £ 300 first prize?

Returning to the Bulgarian, it doesn't prove anything, as Jack suggests, if a player reproduces engine suggestions for a number of moves particularly early in the game. There are a number of reasonable doubts possible. The number of moves doesn't really matter, to the extent that the sequence of moves constitutes an idea, so there's only one match really. Early on in the game, it's well with the bounds of possibility that a player had analysed the position with an engine or even had played and checked the moves in a game not recorded by databases.

I can well believe that players consult engines during turn based games on chess servers. The problem with saying this is always cheating is that unlike OTB or Blitz, it's completely legal to look up lines and positions in a database whilst playing and in the case of the ICCF rule set, blunder checking is legal, again not allowed OTB or in Blitz.

Chris Rice
Posts: 3418
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by Chris Rice » Sun Feb 03, 2013 3:41 pm

I'm sure I could play 8 Houdini moves in a row Jack as well from time to time in blitz with no thought. You've missed my point.

Steve Collyer came up with some batch analysis which was fascinating. In it there were patterns and ratios that could be matched against the moves of chess engines. There were correlations which you could use to detect players checking with their chess engines. Roger's argument seem to run along the lines of ignoring whatever evidence was presented and rubbishing it by saying he could have played the same moves. But the point was that Steve Collyer's analysis demonstrated when a player was using Houdini/Stockfish or whatever engine. It's outside help. It's cheating. Whether you could have played better moves or even the same moves is besides the point. Same as someone sitting an exam for you or taking your driving test for you.

My argument is that it is becoming increasingly easier to cheat. What player who can't seem to get to the grade he/she always hoped for is not going to be tempted to take a short cut if it's easy and there is little downside risk? My feeling is that this is going to be a massive problem in a very short space of time as players come up with new ways of cheating. No doubt we are going to get a few Lance Armstrong's telling us that they had no choice but to cheat as everyone else was doing it.

Don't get me wrong I have nothing against Roger at all. I've played him a number of times over the years and remember beating him and losing to him. If I had to sit down and play him tomorrow I know it would be a really tough game with no quarter given. I respect him as a player and I know he would never cheat. But his stance that there is nothing wrong just supports those who would want to cheat. To quote Edmund Burke "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." I don't intend to stand back and do nothing. All I'm asking for is a high level ACP or FIDE Committee to address the problem.

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 4819
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Sun Feb 03, 2013 3:44 pm

Chris Rice wrote:To quote Edmund Burke "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
Really? When did he say this?

Chris Rice
Posts: 3418
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by Chris Rice » Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:20 pm

1770, modernised version of Burke's Thoughts on the Cause of Present Discontents . Based on "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." The quote is disputed and could even be attributed to Plato but who really gives a toss?

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:23 pm

Chris Rice wrote: But the point was that Steve Collyer's analysis demonstrated when a player was using Houdini/Stockfish or whatever engine.
I don't think it showed any such thing. All it said was that the player made the same choices as the engine used as a control.
Chris Rice wrote:My argument is that it is becoming increasingly easier to cheat.
Perhaps in the sense that it's easier to get useful advice. Hand held computers were around something like twenty five years ago. Laptops with chess engines something like twenty. It's no easier to consult your friend in the lobby or sneak off to analyse than it's ever been. Concealed devices are more readily available, but is there any belief they are in widespread use?

The Feller case was a wake up though. Is there any evidence that a low tech signalling system had ever been previously employed to assist a player? Contact during a game between a player and his support team should be restricted.

I don't support those who would cheat. I don't support accusations of cheating made against over the board players on the sole basis that a computer program is able to reproduce a player's moves. If you caught someone leaving the board with a mobile phone switched and you found a close match, that's a considerable suspicion. If there was no match, you could perhaps accept their innocence. But you cannot and should not accuse someone of cheating in a game of skill purely because of the skill of their moves in the absence of other evidence or plausible hypothesis. The Grandmaster whose pairings are always wrong is apt to make accusations whenever he loses to someone beneath his dignity. That is not behaviour which should be encouraged.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 3486
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:45 pm

Hi Roger.

"But you cannot and should not accuse someone of cheating in a game of skill purely because
of the skill of their moves in the absence of other evidence or plausible hypothesis."

The 'other evidence' is the lads games and grade before the event thus
making it a 'plausible hypothesis'.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21301
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by Roger de Coverly » Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:55 pm

Geoff Chandler wrote: The 'other evidence' is the lads games and grade before the event thus
making it a 'plausible hypothesis'.
Both the Bulgarian and the Italian mayor had been at least 2000-2100 strength. Players of that standard can sometimes match IMs for 19 moves out of 20, the twentieth move being the fatal one.

Chris Rice
Posts: 3418
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:17 am

Re: Chess Player Strip Searched

Post by Chris Rice » Sun Feb 03, 2013 5:11 pm

Roger, I agree there with your point that there are GMs who would blame their losses on their opponents getting computer help simply because they can't deal with the fact that they have lost. I have no sympathy with these people and I thought Mamedyrov should have been penalised in some way for what he accused Korelov of (and couldn't prove) a year or so ago.
However, I completely reject your view that we should say that chess is completely clean from cheating simply because you can't accept it. There is a considerable body of evidence to suggest that this problem is increasing. No I can't prove it but I will say that while I was playing in the Euro Club Cup in Israel In October last year, despite the organisers trying to do their utmost to combat it, I identified numerous players going into the toilets with their smartphones on. I don't know if they were cheating. But I'd like to find some way to assure myself that they couldn't. You can usually tell if a critical position is coming up and think for 20 minutes, then make it look as if you are dying for a leak and dive out of the playing area, as the critical position arises, into a locked cubicle with your smartphone, loaded up with the latest top app. Tempting eh? No doubt you would say that there is no evidence so do nothing.

All I'm asking for is for the ACP or FIDE to look at the problem and do something about it before it gets out of control. If there is no problem, like you seem to suggest, then OK fine there is nothing for the ACP or FIDE to do. Can we agree on that?