Page 4 of 11
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 6:18 pm
by Alex Holowczak
Roger Lancaster wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 5:09 pm
Thanks, Alex, who has [unless I've misunderstood] clarified that we're talking metal detectors rather than something detecting, say, radio waves.
Alex's recommendation, and I'm sure he and others will have researched this, costs around £150 which is probably more than most clubs would wish to afford. On the other hand, there are other metal detectors on Amazon - presumably not so good or 4NCL et al would have purchased them - retailing for £20 or less. I suspect that, were I a cheat, I might well be deterred by knowledge of a metal detector of any type [I probably wouldn't want to ask, "Is your metal detector really good quality?"] which maybe suggests a solution within the price-range of most clubs. There's then the separate issue of those who refuse to submit to a metal detector test and maybe leagues would have to frame their rules accordingly. Thoughts?
Alex McFarlane bought a £20 one, which passed Trial by Andy Howie, who is an expert on such things.
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 6:43 pm
by Nick Ivell
At last! A proper discussion about cheating.
Good to see Danny posting on the forum. We need people who have worked with engines properly, and who understand the game.
There could scarcely be a more important issue. In fact it threatens to ruin the integrity of the game, just as my beloved general knowledge quizzes of the 1990s were ruined by easy access to the internet...
I'm reminded of athletics. If a performance is too good to be true, it probably isn't true.
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:02 pm
by Roger Lancaster
Nick Ivell wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 6:43 pm
I'm reminded of athletics. If a performance is too good to be true, it probably isn't true.
As to athletics, I'm old enough to remember the 1968 Olympic long jump when Bob Beamon broke the world record by almost two feet with a distance many regarded as impossible. There's no question about its authenticity because of the number of witnesses but, if an identical jump had been made at an out-of-the-way sporting event with few witnesses, Nick would - not unreasonably - have been sceptical. Among performances by cheats and fraudsters, there are infrequent occasions when legitimate events such as Beamon's long jump occur which are statistically total outliers.
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:12 pm
by JustinHorton
Anyway there should be protocols for reporting and reacting to too-good-to-be-true performances, surely? (Do FIDE have such things already?)
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:14 pm
by Mick Norris
Alex Holowczak wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 6:18 pm
Roger Lancaster wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 5:09 pm
Thanks, Alex, who has [unless I've misunderstood] clarified that we're talking metal detectors rather than something detecting, say, radio waves.
Alex's recommendation, and I'm sure he and others will have researched this, costs around £150 which is probably more than most clubs would wish to afford. On the other hand, there are other metal detectors on Amazon - presumably not so good or 4NCL et al would have purchased them - retailing for £20 or less. I suspect that, were I a cheat, I might well be deterred by knowledge of a metal detector of any type [I probably wouldn't want to ask, "Is your metal detector really good quality?"] which maybe suggests a solution within the price-range of most clubs. There's then the separate issue of those who refuse to submit to a metal detector test and maybe leagues would have to frame their rules accordingly. Thoughts?
Alex McFarlane bought a £20 one, which passed Trial by Andy Howie, who is an expert on such things.
Do Arbiters courses cover the use of such equipment?
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:21 pm
by Alex Holowczak
Mick Norris wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:14 pm
Do Arbiters courses cover the use of such equipment?
The ECF course covers anti-cheating periperhally. The FIDE course covers the FIDE anti-cheating guidelines and how to work with those.
I don't remember delivering a course where we actively scanned someone by means of a demonstration, but now that you mention it, I do think that's going to be an essential thing to add to future courses.
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:46 pm
by Matt Bridgeman
Roger Lancaster wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:02 pm
Nick Ivell wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 6:43 pm
I'm reminded of athletics. If a performance is too good to be true, it probably isn't true.
As to athletics, I'm old enough to remember the 1968 Olympic long jump when Bob Beamon broke the world record by almost two feet with a distance many regarded as impossible. There's no question about its authenticity because of the number of witnesses but, if an identical jump had been made at an out-of-the-way sporting event with few witnesses, Nick would - not unreasonably - have been sceptical. Among performances by cheats and fraudsters, there are infrequent occasions when legitimate events such as Beamon's long jump occur which are statistically total outliers.
Off on a bit of a tangent, but as an athletics fan, Jonathan Edwards 18 metres 16cm triple jump in the 90's is another one. He broke the world record by a considerable margin, but the evidence is there to see - perfect technique, balance and a peak in performance after years of improvement. If Jonathan had appeared out of nowhere, and broken the world record at say a local Lancaster and Morecambe league meeting, of course people would be scratching their heads. A lot of people wouldn't believe it and he'd be called on it.
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:48 pm
by Nick Ivell
I actually liked Matt's 'non-apology apology.' As elegant an 'apology' as could have been given in the circumstances, I feel.
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:49 pm
by Nick Ivell
You don't get good at chess from nowhere. And Bob Beamon didn't come from nowhere, however amazing his leap (and it's one of the first things I remember).
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:50 pm
by Carl Hibbard
Can we keep these posts neutral on the specific issue please
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 8:06 pm
by NickFaulks
Carl Hibbard wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 7:50 pm
Can we keep these posts neutral on the specific issue please
It is clear to me that these comments are legitimate, but belong in a general "Chess Cheating" thread. Perhaps we have even reached the point where it deserves its own section.
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 8:35 pm
by David Sedgwick
Alex Holowczak wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 9:58 am
There is of course the other common battleground in English chess, which is that independent organisations in general would rather the ECF bugger off and leave them to it, and not interfere with their events. There is no evidence to suggest that the issue is any different from all the other issues where the ECF has been told that.
NickFaulks wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 12:18 pm
True, but in this case there is an overriding reputational issue which the ECF simply cannot ignore.
I have been out for much of the day and the thread has moved on, but I want to respond on the above.
I don't see why the ECF Board won't think that they can get away with ignoring the reputational issue. They have done so up to now.
Unless the Board finally take some action before the next ECF Council Meeting in April 2020, then I think that the necessary number of requisitionists should table a motion for Council instructing them to do so.
Alex says that "independent organisations in general would rather the ECF bugger off and leave them to it". If such a motion were carried, that would refute that as far as this issue is concerned.
And if the motion were defeated, then at least we would know that nothing was ever going to be done.
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 8:58 pm
by JustinHorton
David Sedgwick wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 8:35 pm
Unless the Board finally take some action before the next ECF Council Meeting in April 2020
Do you have anything in particular in mind?
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 9:04 pm
by Roger Lancaster
David Sedgwick wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 8:35 pm
I don't see why the ECF Board won't think that they can get away with ignoring the reputational issue. They have done so up to now.
Unless the Board finally take some action before the next ECF Council Meeting in April 2020, then I think that the necessary number of requisitionists should table a motion for Council instructing them to do so.
I'm not at all sure I agree with David here. I suspect that, like the rest of us, the ECF Board can see there's an increasing problem as regards cheating [or, just possibly, the detection rate for instances and suspected instances of cheating is higher] but the problem is in
finding the appropriate solution. I'm not here as an apologist for the Board but finding a solution doesn't seem simple, as the contributions to this thread would seem to confirm, and ECF Board members can't reasonably be expected to have magic wands.
Re: Statement made by the B&DCL and DCCA
Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 9:25 pm
by NickFaulks
A formal acceptance that "a problem exists and it's our job to do something about it" would be a start. Perhaps I've missed something.