Andrew Martin Chess Academy

[Andrew Martin]

There can be no doubt about it; cheating happens during international chess tournaments. One only has to visit the Chessbase website to read the details.

Has any AMCA or forom member encountered cheating themselves ?

What form did it take and what can be done about it ?

Do you think either of Topalov or Kramnik are guilty as charged ?

And what overall will these scandals do for the image of chess ?


Andrew

[Laramonet]

Hi Andrew / Everyone,
One thing is certain. The scandal around the topic of cheating does the game no good at all. From the "devices in the chair" episode from Fischer v. Spassky and the "colour coded yoghurt / mind-bending psychic" stories of Karpov v. Korchnoi, chess may have even benefitted. They helped to get news coverage but were treated as symptomatic of paranoia or all out battle, not of actual cheating. The recent allegations, following on from the electronic infringements in the Asian sub-continent, do nothing but damage chess in the minds of the general public. The perception is "now that computers can beat the World Champion, even the top people need them to cheat".
Personally, I think there needs to be an investigation and some common standards for control at top class chess events. This needs to ideally be done by a respected, independent, authoritative organisation. Unfortunately, FIDE often seems to fall short of that but it really is the governing body's role.
From a position of personal bias, I tend to believe that Kramnik has acted honourably and that there are accusations against both Topalov and Danailov that need investigating. However, I've not been there to witness anything and so this reinforces the need for a public, independent enquiry.
Has anybody got any ideas on measures that could be taken ? Banning spectators from the playing idea, for example, would seem a counter-productive suggestion but may answer some of the issue.
Adam

[chessparrot]

The trouble is that chess is so complex and can appear so dull; sorry, but it can be boring - that newshounds, journalists and writers latch on to anything that moves and can be comprehended, let alone ridiculed, blowing it out of proportion. Bridge suffered from this at one time. Players were supposed to be signalling with their feet. According to David Spanier, whom I once heard mention the matter, no evidence emerged one way or the other.

All we have to do is be patient. Something else will come along to interest the media. Meanwhile, it is pleasant to see both Kramnik and Topalov playing again.

James Pratt (Basingstoke!)

[Marth]

I think that cheating is a very important problem that needs to be addressed. Hopefully FIDE can handle the problem and resolve it appropriately.

Before the World Championship in Elista, I hoped that Topalov would win as I viewed Kramnik's style as bland and boring. I think that some form of cheating occurred in Elista. During Wijk aan Zee, some reports say that Silvio Dainalov was communicating moves to Topalov. This is quite possible. In Morelia and Linares, Topalov probably wanting to get the monkey off his back, had the courage to tell Dainalov to leave him alone during the games.

Topalov might have cheated, but I honestly don't believe that any of the top players have the desire to cheat. They play each other so much that cheating takes the fun out of the competitive spirit that chess invites. More power to Topalov since he continues playing, although his manager is in the eyes of the chess community a "shady" character.

Topalov is still one of the world's best players, whether he's cheated or not. Who cares if he's cheated? The grandmasters that have played him don't suspect anything so why bother accusing him. Perhaps the events that transpired in Elista, were actually psychological tactics. Karpov and Korchnoi did the same thing accusing each other to try and throw the other person off psychologically.

Anyway, chess is mostly about psychology. Whoever has the upper hand in that respect wins.

[Laramonet]

Hi Marth,
"Who cares if he's cheated? The grandmasters that have played him don't suspect anything so why bother accusing him" I think may be mistaken. From the reports e.g. ChessBase, Morozevich is certainly vocal about his suspicions. They apparently do not speak or even shake hands.
What ever the position, minimums of ettiquette like shaking hands and being civil to the opponent should be observed. It does however show the strength of feeling and need for a set of guidelines from FIDE for playing conditions designed for the players to produce their best chess and for accusations of cheating to be minimised.
Wouldn't a one-way glass screen be possible and not prohibitive in price ?

All the best, Adam

[Marth]

Laramonet, You might be right about Morozevich not even shaking hands or speaking to Topalov. I agree that FIDE should take action to minimize the accusations. In Corus, Kramnik and Topalov didn't shake hands at the beginning of their game.

Also, I do have to point out though Van Wely does not suspect anything. I think that most of the grandmasters (not to mention the chess community) lost a lot of respect for Topalov, due to the events that transpired in Elista. That could be where the grandmasters decided not to shake hands or speak to Topalov. I don't know, and I'm just throwing ideas out there.

Of course, I could be wrong as Laramonet pointed out, but that's ok.

As for the image of chess, the cheating accusations aren't helping chess at all.

As for the glass wall, Laramonet, good idea! Couple that with only the players are allowed in the playing area, and you have the beginnings of a good anti-cheating mechanism.

[Laramonet]

Thanks Marth,
Isn't it funny how two amateurs on a discussion site can come up with a couple of sensible ideas but FIDE appear incapable of coming forward with any proposals ? Perhaps we should be proposed as the FIDE anti-cheating committee !

[Marth]

Of course we should!