parisestmagique wrote on 04/10/11 at 12:18:16:

But the national team DID profit from cheating!

parisestmagique wrote on 04/10/11 at 12:18:16:

They had little choice, can you imagine the outcry if they had tried to keep it hidden for even longer and the story had come out later? The mind boggles!

parisestmagique wrote on 04/08/11 at 07:44:33:

The alleged cheating involves a member of the French team receiving moves from another French Grandmaster via the French team captain, using a French Federation phone. The common word definitely appears to be 'French'! The French team seems to have benefitted most and their opponents have everyone reason to feel aggrieved at losing points unfairly, England should have won 3-1 instead of drawing 2-2, and Russia 2 lost whereas they should have won and "the team’s loss, deprived the second team of any chance of winning a medal." according to the Chairman of the Russian Chess Federation Board.

yeah, the french organisations reacted quite strongly, in contrary to some spanish organisations in other sports (cycling, tennis, football), where medecines like fuentes blooddope all their athletes and win unfairly championship (spain has never won anything, why now out of the sudden ... but of course the spanish government supports this, spain having never been in the spotlight of anything ...)

Quote:

I think it's inappropriate to call this case a "French cheating", the French Federation and French team reacted very well when they discovered the case, they have not allowed Feller to play in the last round against Ukraine which could have bring a medal. The first thing to do was NOT to get a medal this way.This cheating has nothing to do with the team (why loose against a 2300 player if so ?) the only motivation seems to be money.

How old is Feller, after all?  I do not condone what he did, but I think that given his talent, perseverance and some time, he'll be able to live this down.

Stigma wrote on 04/03/11 at 02:36:45:

Indeed, what can possibly have been the motivation for this group cheating? Last night it was suggested to me that it was some sort of 'joke' or 'dare' that got out of hand.

TN wrote on 04/03/11 at 08:20:13:

True, I am surprised that some of his opponents didn't refuse to play against him. On the other hand, the standard of play in the games of his that I've looked at was very high.

GMTonyKosten wrote on 04/03/11 at 00:55:53:


That is just absurd... to think that these people, if guilty, may have ruined their standing in the chess community over something that didn't even have the intended effect (stronger play)!

There are dramatic news - posted today (! - see PS) on Kevinn Spragetts blog:

The extraordinary meeting of the ECU this week in Aix les Bains (France) saw some equally extraordinary changes to the rules of chess.  In particular, to counter  excessive use of databases and computer engines two important modifications to the rules were passed:

1) enpassant is no longer a legal move
2) castling is prohibited if the King has been checked

It rests to see what FIDE, the world governing body of chess, will do now.  It is difficult to imagine that games played in European tournaments can now be included for rating under the ELO rating system.

Silvio Danailov, president of the ECU, surprised everybody with the introduction of these two ammendments to the rules of chess.  ''Enpassant is too complicated a move and is responsible for many young players leaving the game of chess.  Besides, something had to be done to save the game of chess from computers and databases. Thankfully for the game, I am president of the ECU.''

PS: Well - don't miss the date it was posted