Chess fraud in New Zealand

[Simon Spivack]

... you seemed to be saying that 'it's not a big deal because people get away with worse', ...

No I am not.

I am saying that the offence is fairly minor and should be punished accordingly. In my opinion the couple have already been chastised. This was the view taken in the Guinness non-trial (sic), where the charges were infinitely more substantial.

If one opts for a lifetime ban for this; what is the penalty for something serious? Dinner, I suppose.

Deceiving people for monetary gain(however slight) is pretty serious in my view.

Apparently any GM who intentionally publishes faulty analysis, in the hope that someone will play it when money is at stake, should be banned for life.

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.

Although not with a view to earning I living, I trust. I have been told that it is possible to make enough to survive for players of their strength in the UK by teaching chess, I don't know whether this is true in Australasia too; however, winning tuppeny ha'ppeny prizes incognito is, how can I put it, a flawed way of going about it.

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).

If Austin includes the proviso that the degree of turpitude is also a consideration, then I could agree with him.

[Justin Hadi]

I suppose Kasparov should be banned for life for violating the touch move rule against Polgar and thus avoiding a loss....

[Adam Ashton]

Look your point of view is valid and you're entitled to it, I simply disagree. I do think it's a serious offence(in chess playing terms). The other examples given are quite obviously not relevant to this discussion. People follow published analysis at their own risk how you can compare this to cheating of this type I really don't know.
I can only assume you are trying to impress the 'photogenic' Ms Stock because you heard she read this forum. Gd luck with that.

[Roger de Coverly]

For those who haven't seen it, here's Aussie IM Aleks Wohl's take on it

http://www.doubleroo.blogspot.com/

I liked the bit about

licence to blow anything out of all proportion.

[Gareth Harley-Yeo]

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?

There's no link. She sent me a message to my facebook inbox.

[Simon Spivack]

Look ...

I detect a certain rise in temperature, starting from this point. Perhaps an opportunity for one of our moderators to pour the tea, at least virtually.

... your point of view is valid and you're entitled to it, I simply disagree. I do think it's a serious offence(in chess playing terms). The other examples given are quite obviously not relevant to this discussion. People follow published analysis at their own risk how you can compare this to cheating of this type I really don't know.

Adam also wrote: "Deceiving people for monetary gain(however slight) is pretty serious in my view." Justin and I have provided examples demonstrating that this earlier stance of Adam's, as it relates to the chess world, is untenable. I gather Adam no longer subscribes to it.

A lifetime ban, which Adam advocates, or has he changed his mind again, is a maximal penalty. What further punishment is there for something more serious?

I can only assume you are trying to impress the 'photogenic' Ms Stock because you heard she read this forum. Gd luck with that.

Lacking factual accuracy and logic, this ad hominem abuse is worthy of a factotum of the Witchfinder General himself!

It is inaccurate as the first post in which it was mentioned that at least one of the principals is reading this thread can be found on page 4, some time after I started posting.

It is illogical as continuing to post on this subject is unlikely to be received favourably by the two principals. I should add that I am nearly old enough to be the young woman's grandfather!

[Sabrina Chevannes]

CHEATING IS WRONG - full stop.

[Rob Thompson]

CHEATING IS WRONG - full stop.

Yes, thankyou for that. Not sure that that fact was ever really under debate, but it needed to be made anyway, it seems

[LozCooper]

CHEATING IS WRONG - full stop.

The latest rumblings of the "alleged" cheating at the Olympiad involving the French team

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=7070

[Michael Jones]

CHEATING IS WRONG - full stop.

Yes, I think we're agreed on that much. The question is whether all forms of cheating are equally wrong and should therefore be punished equally, or whether some forms are more serious than others. Is stealing £5 from someone less serious an offence than stealing £5,000, or are they equally serious because they both constitute theft?

For those who haven't seen it, here's Aussie IM Aleks Wohl's take on it

http://www.doubleroo.blogspot.com/

I liked the bit about

licence to blow anything out of all proportion.

Doesn't he know that anyone who dares to disagree with Steve Giddins can expect to become the subject of his next blog entry, decrying them for even contemplating such a possibility?