dre wrote on 03/14/09 at 09:10:53:

I was present at the Aeroflot Open and I can ensure you that most players left the playing room after their move. So Kurnosov's behaviour was not that particular. And as I explained in another thread (http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1227214414), cheating at this tournament is not really easy except when you are ready to spend about ten minutes after each move. But then you have two problems to solve: how not to loose on time and how to do this without being seen.
I think that Mamedyarov could not accept he did not see Qd6 during his preparation and so tried to make cheap accusations against Kurnosov to justify his own (lost) position.

Punctually cheating is something which seems easy to me (just have a coach somewhere, go for a coffee or the toilet and get some signs) - but constantly cheating (every move! - and this is the real accusation of Mamedyarov) needs a perfect organization. I doubt this is possible.

Matemax wrote on 03/14/09 at 08:46:40:


If there is another person helping its no so difficult. Excerpts from 
a chessbase readers reply:

"f the GM is relatively strong, as in the case of Kurnosov, just knowing which piece to move without even knowing the computer's choice of square is already a huge advantage. The person signaling the move could do so with just the way he/she is handling her cigarette in the smoking area, i.e. right hand for King side, left hand for queen side, finger and thumb for pawn, index and middle finger for knight, etc."

The debate continues. Mamedyarov has published a reply to Kursunovs letter which again trigger responses from the reader.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5276

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5281

Is it strange that Kurnosov turn down a draw against a player 100 points stronger with the black pieces in an more or less equal position ? I'm checking with Fritz the position after white 14th move and its verdict is +0.23.

parisestmagique wrote on 02/23/09 at 09:59:40:

Yes, one has heard of it and really when you think about it, it is a fine testament to just how far the public face of (titled) chess has sunk. 

If you look at Shakhriyar Mamedyarov's own letter against some of what has been said in this thread on the specific moves themselves, I think maybe Kurnosov is not the real villian here. 
Mamedyarov states “We quickly played 11 moves, on the 12th move I played a move which confused my opponent”. So from this, it can be (reasonably assumed or maybe) concluded that Kurnosov was indeed sufficiently prepared for the opening in question.
In consideration I do think too much as been made of the Mamedyarov claim that his opponent attended the toilet after every move. Just how many times did actually Kurnosov go?
Obviously given the quickness of the moves that Mamedyarov talks about, Kurnosov did not start adjourning to the toilet until the point of 12 or beyond. This means nine trips at most. Further Mamedyarov states that “After suspicion of unfair play on move 14, I offered a draw”. So can it be surmised that supposedly after two trips to the toilet following  moves 12 and 13 that Mamedyarov concluded that his opponent was cheating? I don’t know but as Bonsai has pointed out the game has been reproduced twice up until blacks 15th and once with blacks 16th.  
I would also like to know just how long moves 12 to 21 took to play? If you take Mamedyarov’s claim at face value, did Mamedyarov play a move and his opponent, say, get up and disappear to the toilet for hours on end to wait for Rybka to do its thing or was his opponent back straight away after a quick nervous evacuation and seated thinking a waiting Mamedyarov’s next move?
So if you move off on the bowel motion fixation as evidence, the only other thing on the table is Mamedyarov’s claim about Kurnosov’s move matching Rybka. Perhaps the best way to refute that is to take a famous game before the age of computers which contains a flashing ending and see what an engine comes up with. Take Marshall’s famous queen sac against Levitzky (or Levitsky) at Breslau in 1912, my tired old Fritz 7 found Marshall’s Qg3 in under 5 seconds. 
So all in all Mamedyarov’s calm is at best on his evidence to date, thin. It is really hard to say what when on but it sounds more like a case of contempt and sour grapes you would find on any internet chess server. You know the sort…”how dare you beat me. I am rated higher than you! Thusly you are a cheat!”….couple this with the ever creeping nonsense of FIDE and the world championship cycle, PCA trying to be the inmates running the asylum and grandmasters being less than grand, it is not a wonder that some thing like this keeps coming along. Grandmasters? BAH!
HTH

drkodos wrote on 02/23/09 at 23:03:39:


Arbitrary arbiters, hmm there's got to be a pun there   

If he was found to have cigs in his coat, it's not entirely imposible he was outside in the cold having a crafty puff between moves. 

The first new move apparently was Black's 16th.
Black's 17th was a forced recapture
His 18th was a check
His 19th developed an undeveloped piece
His 20th moved an attacked piece so that it attacked the enemy queen
[So far, I don't think I flatter myself in saying that I would be disappointed if I hadn't at least considered these moves]
His 21st, and last move, is a stunner (but not that difficult once you've seen the idea).

As for his leaving the board after every move and taking his jacket with him - we only have his opponent's word for that, and it seems extremely unlikely as it would pointlessly arouse suspicion.

Is it exceptional to go strolling/for a smoke when still in your prep and your opponent is thinking hard ?