Latest Updates:
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Guerrillas Gambit Style (Read 2470 times)
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2098
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #40 - 04/04/21 at 00:52:11
Post Tools
Bibs wrote on 04/02/21 at 08:27:03:
Nickajack wrote on 04/02/21 at 07:04:25:
(Since we're already off-topic), I can't help but wonder: what does Radjabov's (self-) exclusion from the Candidates have to do with this (cheating related) matter?


I'm assuming that it is in the sense of a perceived FIDE faux pas.


Thanks for the assist Bibs, I thought the inference would have been obvious, but sometimes I forget that not all forum users are native english speakers.

Not much else to add to the debate for now really, except to say that if being more transparent with quality of evidence means cheaters get a bit more insight on how to better conceal their deceit, then I still consider that to be the lesser of two evils.
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2230
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #39 - 04/02/21 at 08:27:03
Post Tools
Nickajack wrote on 04/02/21 at 07:04:25:
(Since we're already off-topic), I can't help but wonder: what does Radjabov's (self-) exclusion from the Candidates have to do with this (cheating related) matter?


I'm assuming that it is in the sense of a perceived FIDE faux pas.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Nickajack
Junior Member
**
Offline


Yabba Dabba Doo!

Posts: 57
Location: USA
Joined: 02/21/17
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #38 - 04/02/21 at 07:04:25
Post Tools
(Since we're already off-topic), I can't help but wonder: what does Radjabov's (self-) exclusion from the Candidates have to do with this (cheating related) matter?
  

Dubious, therefore playable Undecided
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1170
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #37 - 04/01/21 at 14:13:26
Post Tools
Dink Heckler wrote on 04/01/21 at 08:06:02:
The problem with full transparency is that if you clearly lay out the criteria that will lead to an exclusion, it becomes trivially simple for cheaters to cheat in a way that doesn't meet the threshold for exclusion.

Actually, a cheat has enough information *now* to defeat the algorithms for all time. I could trivially write a program that would do that, but I won't say how so as not to help any cheats who don't already know. Of course it would come at a cost to the cheater, in that they would only win some of the time, instead of all the time.

One thing that is militating against the cheaters is there's no real money in it. There's bragging rights and putting accomplishments on a CV and so forth, but reputation is not transferable. So you have a bunch of individuals using their own more or less unsophisticated cheating approaches. They can't share information and "best" practices widely, because there's no monetary incentive for their confidant to keep the secret.

I love how nobody cares how far off-topic this thread has become.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1170
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #36 - 04/01/21 at 13:40:07
Post Tools
Bibs wrote on 04/01/21 at 01:18:00:
I eventually think I understand his meaning - that it is suspicious in terms of the computer use allegation. Maybe. That it does not fit, as the move played is not optimal.† I guess the software is crying out for Rxa6, but she punted Qg4 instead. I would have played that too.

Isn't it an example of human bias to focus on individual moves like this? Edited:
And I did the same thing in an earlier post.
Chess24's algorithm, or Regan's, or pgn-spy (if indeed these are different), will look at all the moves and weight them equally. From a statistical point of view Rxa6 vs Qg4 is just one data point out of the 174 available, indistinguishable from the others. Of course there can be some sophistication beyond just a binary =(top engine move) true/false, but it couldn't really get to the level of =(type of move an engine would prefer but a human wouldn't). The only way the engine stylistic preference would come into play is second-order, through the evaluation.

hicetnunc wrote on 04/01/21 at 10:02:44:
I've laid out the pgn-spy scores with the few samples I have for rapid play.

Great. I will look at these after work. Google docs is blocked here on the work network, as it should be.

Was thinking about my understanding or lack thereof. A strong player is expected to agree more with the engine. In the article Bibs linked, it's stated (or implied) that Regan corrects the output for this. Does pgn-spy do the same thing? Or does pgn-spy produce a raw engine difference and leave that up to us to interpret based on previous differences measured? Edited:
I realize the google doc probably lays this out, but at some point it should be summarized.


TopNotch wrote on 04/01/21 at 00:48:05:
This has the potential to turn into as much of a fiasco as Radjabov's exclusion from the Candidates was.

Bibs wrote on 04/01/21 at 12:44:31:
If sheís legit (but how to ultimately determine? How much Ďevidenceí?) ), a big apology and some nice invites should be forthcoming. Oh dearie me on this kerfuffle.

Taking these two quotes together...

From my point of view it's a boon to get such a clearly unclear case early in the process. One of the biases people have is consistency, so if the fair play process has been perceived to be "working well" for a while, then an individual injustice becomes more tolerable -- in the biased human mind.

It almost doesn't matter if Osmak cheated or not. Of course it matters to her. But to me it matters more that people have doubts that the fair play process can have any hope of being error free. As Dink Henckler said, it's *always* a choice between type 1 or type 2 errors.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2230
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #35 - 04/01/21 at 12:44:31
Post Tools
Thatís a lot of interesting data. Very interesting.
Might be worth noting there that Magsoodloo also got busted.

Itís noted elsewhere (Doggers, chess.com) that she has very limited vision in one eye (16%) and has a habit of seemingly looking away, in order to see the screen properly.

I wonder whether there may be a perfect storm here of unfortunate situations leading to this decision.

Iíd hate to be on a panel judging such things - itís unenviable.

If sheís legit (but how to ultimately determine? How much Ďevidenceí?) ), a big apology and some nice invites should be forthcoming. Oh dearie me on this kerfuffle.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
hicetnunc
Full Member
***
Offline


"Do something scary every
day"

Posts: 221
Location: Paris, France
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #34 - 04/01/21 at 10:02:44
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 03/31/21 at 22:07:21:
hicetnunc wrote on 03/31/21 at 20:21:55:
You can have a very strong TPR and have engine correlation scores average for your rating or only slightly above what's expected.

Doesn't this imply that some or all of your opponents played badly? In other words they have poor correlation scores for their rating.

If that's not the case then there is something I am not understanding about how the scores are calculated.


I've laid out the pgn-spy scores with the few samples I have for rapid play. I can't draw any conclusions from this (baselines are too slim), but it gives an idea why a detection system based on statistics may have been triggered here.

Line 18 is an example of a (non-suspect) young French player crushing a field of lower-rated opponents (2200 vs. 1700)

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JJvdAg9eQsVbUMWpk5bVWOgJ8q-y6lPEYRViSC3n...
  

48 yo, 1920 elo
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dink Heckler
God Member
*****
Offline


Love-Forty

Posts: 796
Joined: 02/01/07
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #33 - 04/01/21 at 08:06:02
Post Tools
We all desire transparency; the lack thereof is contrary to our sense of natural justice.

The problem with full transparency is that if you clearly lay out the criteria that will lead to an exclusion, it becomes trivially simple for cheaters to cheat in a way that doesn't meet the threshold for exclusion. Again, this puts us in the invidious position that the demands of justice and competitive integrity are at loggerheads.
  

'Am I any good at tactics?'
'Computer says No!'
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2230
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #32 - 04/01/21 at 01:18:00
Post Tools
Quick note. I know exactly the point you note, and I couldn't get that either for a bit. 'Huh?' I thought.

Hikaru was unfortunately very unclear in his meaning here. That's the problem in thinking on one's feet sometimes - a lack of clarity.

I eventually think I understand his meaning - that it is suspicious in terms of the computer use allegation. Maybe. That it does not fit, as the move played is not optimal.† I guess the software is crying out for Rxa6, but she punted Qg4 instead. I would have played that too.

Yes, the relatively poor play of the losing opponents (no disrespect intended to anyone - we are looking at the winner here) means that the wins generate an unduly high TPR, but without requiring spectacular 2700/2800-like play.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2098
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #31 - 04/01/21 at 00:48:05
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 03/31/21 at 22:20:21:
Dink Heckler wrote on 03/31/21 at 14:30:57:
These discussions always go around in circles, because the twin goals of due process and sporting integrity are at odds with each other, and can not be readily reconciled.

The only discussion we can sensibly have is whether we tolerate more type one errors or type two errors. There are no ideal answers; only messy compromises with reality (which can be anathema to the chess mind). If we insist on no bans /annulment of results without definitive proof, we accept that online chess as a competitive enterprise is not viable. If we want competitive online chess to be viable, we accept some false positives as the cost of doing business.


hicetnunc wrote on 03/31/21 at 16:26:43:
I think the situation isn't this drastic. I believe it's possible to have reasonable anti-cheating measures by mixing statistics and other systems, provided you give players the benefit of the doubt - ie. you accept some false negatives to avoid false positives.

By tinkering with the pgn-spy tool for many years, I've observed that (except maybe at the very top), human play is still very different from engine play. In rapid, I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to develop a reasonably robust system. There are many variables you can look at (engine correlation scores, blunder rates, complexity of position (Regan), time spent per move). I suspect not enough time/resources have been devoted to the topic yet, but frankly, it shouldn't be more difficult to design an adequate detection system than to develop 3600-playing engines.


Well I thought Dink Heckler's post was spot on. My own view is strongly leaning towards the position: "If we insist on no bans /annulment of results without definitive proof, we accept that online chess as a competitive enterprise is not viable."

I recognize there is a large plurality that has a different view, but I resolve the conflict simply by shunning online competitions. The most I am willing to do is chew on these issues in discussions here, but it's easy to be dispassionate if it will never affect me directly.


I don't think definitive proof should necessarily be the Benchmark, but the evidence should be compelling, transparent and detailed enough to stand scrutiny, and certainly an accused player must have some right of appeal to plead his or her case.†

In my estimation Osmak's opponents played too poorly for a statistical analysis to be convincing, with the possible exception of the King's Indian game I reckon I could have found all the moves she did under the same conditions. There is one point I sort of disagreed with Hikaru on though, and that is in one game where he thought not recapturing a pawn and instead going for a mate in one threat to be a bit suspicious, to me however this seemed like typical human play for Rapid & Blitz.

This case just smells of over reach and while I acknowledge that electronic cheating is a vexing problem that threatens the veracity of competitive chess, we still must take care not to throw out the baby with the bath water.

This has the potential to turn into as much of a fiasco as Radjabov's exclusion from the Candidates was.


« Last Edit: 04/01/21 at 18:06:47 by TopNotch »  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1170
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #30 - 03/31/21 at 22:20:21
Post Tools
Dink Heckler wrote on 03/31/21 at 14:30:57:
These discussions always go around in circles, because the twin goals of due process and sporting integrity are at odds with each other, and can not be readily reconciled.

The only discussion we can sensibly have is whether we tolerate more type one errors or type two errors. There are no ideal answers; only messy compromises with reality (which can be anathema to the chess mind). If we insist on no bans /annulment of results without definitive proof, we accept that online chess as a competitive enterprise is not viable. If we want competitive online chess to be viable, we accept some false positives as the cost of doing business.


hicetnunc wrote on 03/31/21 at 16:26:43:
I think the situation isn't this drastic. I believe it's possible to have reasonable anti-cheating measures by mixing statistics and other systems, provided you give players the benefit of the doubt - ie. you accept some false negatives to avoid false positives.

By tinkering with the pgn-spy tool for many years, I've observed that (except maybe at the very top), human play is still very different from engine play. In rapid, I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to develop a reasonably robust system. There are many variables you can look at (engine correlation scores, blunder rates, complexity of position (Regan), time spent per move). I suspect not enough time/resources have been devoted to the topic yet, but frankly, it shouldn't be more difficult to design an adequate detection system than to develop 3600-playing engines.


Well I thought Dink Heckler's post was spot on. My own view is strongly leaning towards the position: "If we insist on no bans /annulment of results without definitive proof, we accept that online chess as a competitive enterprise is not viable."

I recognize there is a large plurality that has a different view, but I resolve the conflict simply by shunning online competitions. The most I am willing to do is chew on these issues in discussions here, but it's easy to be dispassionate if it will never affect me directly.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1170
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #29 - 03/31/21 at 22:07:21
Post Tools
hicetnunc wrote on 03/31/21 at 20:21:55:
You can have a very strong TPR and have engine correlation scores average for your rating or only slightly above what's expected.

Doesn't this imply that some or all of your opponents played badly? In other words they have poor correlation scores for their rating.

If that's not the case then there is something I am not understanding about how the scores are calculated.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
hicetnunc
Full Member
***
Offline


"Do something scary every
day"

Posts: 221
Location: Paris, France
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #28 - 03/31/21 at 20:21:55
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 03/29/21 at 22:46:33:
(...)

To be clear, when I played through Osmak's games I could plainly see she played way above her 2400 rating. hicetnunc's analysis confirms it. But to me it's not a red flag. How many players were in the event? Not just counting her 6-player group, but counting all players. In a group that large, the distribution of net-Elo performances will easily be from -400 to +400. Of course most will perform close to their published Elo, but even without any real improvement *somebody* is bound to have an outlandish performance; it just happened to be her. That's one explanation. The fair play people gave a different explanation.


Just to clarify, I meant that the scores output of PGN-spy is similar to what you would expect from a 2750 in a long game, which is different from having a +300/+400 perf. (although in this case both happened). You can have a very strong TPR and have engine correlation scores average for your rating or only slightly above what's expected. That's why there's cause for concern here.

Having strong TPR happens, but having both a strong TPR and very high engine correlation scores at the same time must be less frequent.
  

48 yo, 1920 elo
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
hicetnunc
Full Member
***
Offline


"Do something scary every
day"

Posts: 221
Location: Paris, France
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #27 - 03/31/21 at 16:26:43
Post Tools
Dink Heckler wrote on 03/31/21 at 14:30:57:
These discussions always go around in circles, because the twin goals of due process and sporting integrity are at odds with each other, and can not be readily reconciled.

The only discussion we can sensibly have is whether we tolerate more type one errors or type two errors. There are no ideal answers; only messy compromises with reality (which can be anathema to the chess mind). If we insist on no bans /annulment of results without definitive proof, we accept that online chess as a competitive enterprise is not viable. If we want competitive online chess to be viable, we accept some false positives as the cost of doing business.


I think the situation isn't this drastic. I believe it's possible to have reasonable anti-cheating measures by mixing statistics and other systems, provided you give players the benefit of the doubt - ie. you accept some false negatives to avoid false positives.

By tinkering with the pgn-spy tool for many years, I've observed that (except maybe at the very top), human play is still very different from engine play. In rapid, I don't see why it wouldn't be possible to develop a reasonably robust system. There are many variables you can look at (engine correlation scores, blunder rates, complexity of position (Regan), time spent per move). I suspect not enough time/resources have been devoted to the topic yet, but frankly, it shouldn't be more difficult to design an adequate detection system than to develop 3600-playing engines.
  

48 yo, 1920 elo
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dink Heckler
God Member
*****
Offline


Love-Forty

Posts: 796
Joined: 02/01/07
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #26 - 03/31/21 at 14:30:57
Post Tools
These discussions always go around in circles, because the twin goals of due process and sporting integrity are at odds with each other, and can not be readily reconciled.

The only discussion we can sensibly have is whether we tolerate more type one errors or type two errors. There are no ideal answers; only messy compromises with reality (which can be anathema to the chess mind). If we insist on no bans /annulment of results without definitive proof, we accept that online chess as a competitive enterprise is not viable. If we want competitive online chess to be viable, we accept some false positives as the cost of doing business.
  

'Am I any good at tactics?'
'Computer says No!'
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2230
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #25 - 03/31/21 at 01:01:08
Post Tools
TopNotch wrote on 03/30/21 at 22:38:35:
Hikaru has now also weighed in on his Youtube channel and shares my opinion that nothing in the five games themselves seems to suggest engine cheating by Osmak, Iulija, however he feels there is more to the story than meets the eye. I have to admit, this case really has me intrigued.

Here is the Hikaru link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0Jt4WB3KQ0

Thoughts?


Thanks for the link. Hikaru is really good on YouTube I think. Incredibly strong, obviously, he is personable and cheerful, and he explains well for punters. I don't watch the Twitchy stuff and all sorts of challenges against pseudo-slebs and all that, just the blitz chess against other strong GMs, and it is instructive and fun.

> The games and the moves
I looked through the games there as Hikaru played through them. Looks like a reasonable player beating others who all misplay their openings. Not impressed by her opponents particularly. I would have fancied winning all those too - as the opponents kinda rolled over and died. Repeated opponents going for early baths will result in a z-score overreach over just several games, of course.

Question 1 - Is this just a decent FM/IM strength player putting some not-so-good play to sleep?
Question 2 - What other evidence is there?

> Sutovsky FB
Sutovsky's FB page is open to all (and which is curiously still seemingly both his personal and official page). Discussions there. Notable are comments by Macieja.

One would very much hope that when such accusations (and resulting punishments) occur that the evidence - matches, move times, physical observations etc - is just so strong as to be incontrovertible.

Yes, I agree, it is intriguing.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1170
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #24 - 03/30/21 at 23:00:13
Post Tools
I noticed the boldface when you disputed my contention that +300 was not unusual. Before we go in circles on that, we should agree on what usual/unusual mean. I'll go first. By not unusual I mean that +300 could happen in (guessing here) one-half of large, 100-player OTB swisses, or up to 0.5% of tournament entries. I admit I don't have any statistics to back that up, it's just what my intuition says. What numbers do you mean when you say it is unusual?

The FIDE University tournament disqualified 2% of the players. If my 0.5% is reasonable (which it may not be), then perhaps one-fourth of them didn't deserve disqualification.

Thanks for the link.

Quote:
An important thing to bear in mind is that a playerís z score does not correlate with their rating: for example, a grandmaster wonít get z=3  because they are a grandmaster. If a grandmaster plays like one, theyíll get approximately z=0. On the other hand, if I play like a grandmaster with my humble 1600 Elo rating, my z-score would be significantly >0.
    For this reason, it is important to get the input rating right for Professor Reganís system.

The scenario I offered of an under-rated junior would be the equivalent of inputting the wrong rating. And I would like to see z-score plotted against (TPR - Elo). That would certainly put a bound on +300 occurrences.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2098
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #23 - 03/30/21 at 22:38:35
Post Tools
Hikaru has now also weighed in on his Youtube channel and shares my opinion that nothing in the five games themselves seems to suggest engine cheating by Osmak, Iulija, however he feels there is more to the story than meets the eye. I have to admit, this case really has me intrigued.

Here is the Hikaru link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0Jt4WB3KQ0

Thoughts?
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2230
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #22 - 03/30/21 at 00:17:13
Post Tools
Replying to aoc re: performing at +300 or +400.
Well, it is unusual, obviously enough. It is uncommon, but it does happen and has happened.

That is what Standard Deviation is for, and the Z-scores. To look at probabilities and outliers at the upper end. (At the lower†Z end - people have bad days, or are just watching telly or mowing the lawn while playing!)

When it (a high TPR in a winning performance) happens online, and when the moves are found to be rated highly overall for matches, that is obviously something that gets very closely looked at. Stats, move matches, behaviours, timings.

There was a useful summary written by senior FIDE arbiter Alex Holowczak about this.

Edit / Update: https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/8312.pdf
p.22 there


I was reading an MBA book in passing yesterday, and it came up in there about how unreliable we are in terms of our biases, assumptions, and our numeracy. Reminded me of this situation. We see in the chess24 discussion there is much heat, but insufficient light.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1170
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #21 - 03/29/21 at 22:46:33
Post Tools
Analyzing one event at a time will probably never give enough moves to provide a statistically reliable conclusion. Either events will need to be aggregated, or other types of evidence added, or both. It sounds like that's what they've done here, but it's not an easy job.

Let's not jump to conclusions though. It's not at all unusual for a tournament winner to outperform their published Elo by 300 or even 400. It's not even a red flag, especially in shorter events. Some play better than their Elo, others play worse. Just take a look at the winner's TPR in a big open like Gibraltar. Only if someone does it in event after event is it a red flag. But then what would one say about Fischer's streak in 1970-1971? Impossible, right?

Even multiple events is still not conclusive, because you have to allow for people studying like crazy and just improving. I remember being a sub-1600 player for about a year. Some 43 years ago when USCF ratings came out quarterly and were already out-of-date when published, my number was 1599 and I knew this was it. I entered every U1600 event I could find and even traveled out-of-state to find some more. I won every game except one! I was winning that one too but became over-confident. My next published rating was 1760, and three months after that I was a little over 1800. No cheating whatsoever, I just needed to ripen as a player. But statistically impossible I guess.

One other effect is the amplification provided by the playing-the-rating blunder. For example, what if some improving junior (me 40+ years ago) has a published rating of 1599 but a true strength of about 1800? In that scenario, a 1700 opponent may take some risks against a 1600 that they wouldn't try against an 1800. And that's how an (unpublished) 1800 player ends up with a TPR closer to 2000. Once the published rating catches up, opponents start playing more sanely, and the consecutive outlandish performances stop.

To be clear, when I played through Osmak's games I could plainly see she played way above her 2400 rating. hicetnunc's analysis confirms it. But to me it's not a red flag. How many players were in the event? Not just counting her 6-player group, but counting all players. In a group that large, the distribution of net-Elo performances will easily be from -400 to +400. Of course most will perform close to their published Elo, but even without any real improvement *somebody* is bound to have an outlandish performance; it just happened to be her. That's one explanation. The fair play people gave a different explanation.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2098
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #20 - 03/29/21 at 21:30:59
Post Tools
Part 2:

Results revision:
The disqualified player may be declared lost in one or several games he/she played in the current or/and previous rounds of the event. The result of the player in those games shall be converted to loss by forfeit. The opponents of the previous rounds shall be granted half a point by forfeit additional to the original result. Thus, an opponent who lost to a disqualified player shall receive a half point bye, whereas an opponent who made a draw shall receive a full point bye. Wins against disqualified players will be converted to wins by forfeit.

Disqualification:
Neither FIDE, nor the Hosting Internet Platform claims that the determination of a suspected fair play violation is proof of actual cheating or an admission of guilt by the disqualified player. Such a determination shall not affect the ordinary status of the player for over-the-board competitions within the jurisdiction of FIDE or its members, unless FPP decides in the case of a clear or gross violation, or repeated violations, to refer the matter to the FIDE Ethics and Disciplinary

This document boggles the mind.
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2098
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #19 - 03/29/21 at 21:27:01
Post Tools
I have been reviewing the Fair Trading Committee statements and edicts more closely and it made me shudder to think that a governing body has the audacity to assume they can get away with such autocracy. Some of their policies are complete lunacy, and makes me wonder who is running the asylum.

In this case the cure being worse than the disease is an understatement and opens the door to wholesale corruption. Imagine banning Magnus or Caruana for fairplay violations and then stipulating the verdict or sentence is final and cannot be challenged or appealed in anyway while also claiming that a ban for fair play violation does not harm the player's reputation. Whoever was involved in drafting such a ridiculous  document should be impeached and removed forthwith.

Judge for yourselves:

"FIDE World University online chess championships 2021 Fair Play FIDE World University Individual Online Blitz Championship (14 March)

The Fair Play Panel (FPP) of the FIDE World University Chess Championships, after examining the games followed by several meetings, disqualified 5 (five) players from the World University Individual Online Blitz Championship for breach of Fair Play.
Due to the large number of games (4763 in total), the procedure took 70 hours to perform the fair play check.
The investigation included:
- statistical evidence
- Host internet platform (HIP) evidence
- physical evidence
- expert opinion
The statistics included several parameters, which combined with the other criteria lead to the decision for disqualification.

As part of our ongoing efforts to build a community of players that play fairly at all times, a Fair Play review is conducted during every event. We supervise players during their games and undertake a comprehensive analysis of all games played in order to protect players with exceptional performances from accusations of unfair play.
The decision of FPP to disqualify a player for a suspected fair play violation is final and is not subject to any appeal, review or other challenge. The disqualified players have lost their right to participate in the next events of the 2021 Online University Championships.
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2098
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #18 - 03/29/21 at 21:02:18
Post Tools
hicetnunc wrote on 03/29/21 at 20:25:21:
It's an open-source tool to collect some statistics from pgn files. I've sent you a pm.

https://github.com/MGleason1/PGN-Spy


Thanks.
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
hicetnunc
Full Member
***
Offline


"Do something scary every
day"

Posts: 221
Location: Paris, France
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #17 - 03/29/21 at 20:25:21
Post Tools
It's an open-source tool to collect some statistics from pgn files. I've sent you a pm.

https://github.com/MGleason1/PGN-Spy
  

48 yo, 1920 elo
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2098
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #16 - 03/29/21 at 19:24:59
Post Tools
hicetnunc wrote on 03/29/21 at 18:33:58:
Quick report (for player Osmak): pgn-spy scores are indeed very high for someone at this level (they are similar to what you would expect from a 2750+ player in 2hrs games), but the sample is too small to be fully conclusive imo.

Definitely ground for suspicions though, so I can understand the ban if they use better tools (hopefully !) or do have additional pieces of evidence.

disclaimer : I'm using my own methods and baselines


The fair play report states that a large number of games (4763 in total), were studied and the procedure took 70 hours to perform before reaching their verdict. This suggests that some of the players had already aroused suspicion and that data was quietly being collected and analysed behind the scenes. Still until more is known Osmak and others have to be afforded the benefit of the doubt. BTW what is this pgn-spy you speak of, I presume it is some kind of statistical tool.
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
hicetnunc
Full Member
***
Offline


"Do something scary every
day"

Posts: 221
Location: Paris, France
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #15 - 03/29/21 at 18:33:58
Post Tools
Quick report (for player Osmak): pgn-spy scores are indeed very high for someone at this level (they are similar to what you would expect from a 2750+ player in 2hrs games), but the sample is too small to be fully conclusive imo.

Definitely ground for suspicions though, so I can understand the ban if they use better tools (hopefully !) or do have additional pieces of evidence.

disclaimer : I'm using my own methods and baselines
  

48 yo, 1920 elo
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1170
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #14 - 03/29/21 at 17:07:16
Post Tools
TopNotch's file has time remaining. Here's one with time consumed per move, as shown in the chess24 UI.
  

fideUniversityWomen.pgn ( 23 KB | 15 Downloads )
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2098
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #13 - 03/29/21 at 16:55:25
Post Tools
hicetnunc wrote on 03/29/21 at 10:01:07:
Bibs wrote on 03/29/21 at 07:26:24:
What does PGNspy say? Anyone use that?

Itís not just the moves of course. Itís clock times too.
And anything odd if players are on camera (this was a Petrosian issue iirc). When published ratings are known, itís also about SD and Z-scores too, as we know.

Note - I have no particular comment or opinion on this case. Iíve not seen the games yet, and know no one involved.


I have experience with pgn-spy, so I can have a look, but it's unlikely a 5-games sample is enough to reach solid conclusions for a player at this level.

I wasn't able to locate a pgn of the games though ?! Could someone help locate it ?


Relevant pgn file attached, please let me know what you find.
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2098
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #12 - 03/29/21 at 16:42:35
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 03/29/21 at 14:53:56:
hicetnunc wrote on 03/29/21 at 10:01:07:
Bibs wrote on 03/29/21 at 07:26:24:
What does PGNspy say? Anyone use that?

Itís not just the moves of course. Itís clock times too.
And anything odd if players are on camera (this was a Petrosian issue iirc). When published ratings are known, itís also about SD and Z-scores too, as we know.

Note - I have no particular comment or opinion on this case. Iíve not seen the games yet, and know no one involved.


I have experience with pgn-spy, so I can have a look, but it's unlikely a 5-games sample is enough to reach solid conclusions for a player at this level.

I wasn't able to locate a pgn of the games though ?! Could someone help locate it ?


I can produce a pgn from chess24. Does pgn-spy use move times? If yes, what time format is required? Chess24 gives per-move time consumed like so:
1 d4 0.29 Nf6 0.31 3s
2 c4 0.26 1s g6 0.53 1s

I can produce times either incremental/total, consumed/remaining. Format m:ss would be like so:
1. d4 {0:00} Nf6 {0:03}
2. c4 {0:01} g6 {0:01}

One of the games the arbiter stopped the clocks, I don't know if I could produce valid times remaining for that game.


To be honest I looked at the games and nothing really jumped out at me. However based on something stated in the fair play committee report it would appear that Osmak, Iulija had already been under suspicion even before this tournament.
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1170
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #11 - 03/29/21 at 14:53:56
Post Tools
hicetnunc wrote on 03/29/21 at 10:01:07:
Bibs wrote on 03/29/21 at 07:26:24:
What does PGNspy say? Anyone use that?

Itís not just the moves of course. Itís clock times too.
And anything odd if players are on camera (this was a Petrosian issue iirc). When published ratings are known, itís also about SD and Z-scores too, as we know.

Note - I have no particular comment or opinion on this case. Iíve not seen the games yet, and know no one involved.


I have experience with pgn-spy, so I can have a look, but it's unlikely a 5-games sample is enough to reach solid conclusions for a player at this level.

I wasn't able to locate a pgn of the games though ?! Could someone help locate it ?


I can produce a pgn from chess24. Does pgn-spy use move times? If yes, what time format is required? Chess24 gives per-move time consumed like so:
1 d4 0.29 Nf6 0.31 3s
2 c4 0.26 1s g6 0.53 1s

I can produce times either incremental/total, consumed/remaining. Format m:ss would be like so:
1. d4 {0:00} Nf6 {0:03}
2. c4 {0:01} g6 {0:01}

One of the games the arbiter stopped the clocks, I don't know if I could produce valid times remaining for that game.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
hicetnunc
Full Member
***
Offline


"Do something scary every
day"

Posts: 221
Location: Paris, France
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #10 - 03/29/21 at 10:01:07
Post Tools
Bibs wrote on 03/29/21 at 07:26:24:
What does PGNspy say? Anyone use that?

Itís not just the moves of course. Itís clock times too.
And anything odd if players are on camera (this was a Petrosian issue iirc). When published ratings are known, itís also about SD and Z-scores too, as we know.

Note - I have no particular comment or opinion on this case. Iíve not seen the games yet, and know no one involved.


I have experience with pgn-spy, so I can have a look, but it's unlikely a 5-games sample is enough to reach solid conclusions for a player at this level.

I wasn't able to locate a pgn of the games though ?! Could someone help locate it ?
  

48 yo, 1920 elo
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2230
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #9 - 03/29/21 at 08:32:13
Post Tools
Yes, I share some of your feelings there TopNotch. The lack of a right of appeal leaves me feeling rather queasy. It does appear to run counter to proper and accepted ways of doing things.

Obviously the provider, whichever it may be for any of these events, does not wish to reveal too much of the means of identifying cheating, as it then becomes an arms race between cheaters and the websites. That canít happen, no. And I guess the content of the published statement would have been agreed in advance of such an event.

Presumably when providers announce big Ďcontravening the rulesí things like this, they believe they have the player(s) pretty much 100% bang to rights. Due to a mix of all types of evidence (as stated).

Iíll share a cheating story from OTB while I am here. (Have I said before? Itís possible.) 2004 Calvia Olympiad. Versus Hong Kong on board one. Neither player much good really (around 2200), must be said, but all countries can go and fight! The guy touched a piece, then tried to move another. Really blatant. Iíve never been so utterly shocked at the board - that he could even think of trying such, and even doing it. And at this flagship event too.
My reaction was a huge ĎWTF?í Complete shock (both were fairly short of time, near time control btw). I looked at him, looked around for a witness, in desperate hope. Incredibly, happily, an arbiter was right behind him and saw this unfold clearly. He made the HK player move the touched piece - a knight on the edge iirc. Phew. I won. Happy ending, but Iíll have words if I see the bloke again. Cheating ******d. Plus, huge respect to that arbiter who was alert and there. Wish I knew who.

Well, OTB canít be far off again for all of us, wherever we are. Six months, a year...

Cheers
B
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2098
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #8 - 03/29/21 at 07:42:35
Post Tools
Bibs wrote on 03/29/21 at 03:50:39:


Thanks very much for bringing that scandal to my attention, a very curious case indeed. I have not analysed any of the games as yet so cannot reach any conclusions, but a few observations:

1. There needs to be more transparency, it is ludicrous to disqualify players deny them any right of appeal, claiming fair play violations but not necessarily cheating violations. This goes against all the laws of natural justice.

2. Cheating in Rapid Chess with an engine is more difficult to pull off simply due to the time control. Not impossible though, see the Tigran Petrosian case.

3. The panel claims to have physical evidence supporting their verdict of fair play violations, if that is the case they need to disclose it.

4.†The panel claims to have "Host internet platform (HIP)" evidence to support their claim of fair play violations, again they need to disclose exactly what this is and how the disqualified players are involved.

As it stands I sympathise with the players plight based on what has been presented thus far, which seems a lot like railroading and abuse of authority to me. Let's hope more comes to light in the coming weeks to clarify this situation.
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2230
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #7 - 03/29/21 at 07:26:24
Post Tools
What does PGNspy say? Anyone use that?

Itís not just the moves of course. Itís clock times too.
And anything odd if players are on camera (this was a Petrosian issue iirc). When published ratings are known, itís also about SD and Z-scores too, as we know.

Note - I have no particular comment or opinion on this case. Iíve not seen the games yet, and know no one involved.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1170
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #6 - 03/29/21 at 05:38:15
Post Tools
First, I find it simply disingenuous to say someone was disqualified for fair play violations, but that does not mean it was "actual" cheating.

I played through the Iulija Osmak games and it seems inconclusive to me. She played a lot of very good moves, but she certainly did not play any crazy "engine move". Sure, she played great and her opponents did not, but at least two of her opponents put themselves in time pressure pretty early. In another one she was behind early but just managed the clock better. Overall her time usage makes sense for human play. Maybe things just went her way and she was never under pressure. Or maybe she cheated. She only played 174 moves in the five games, it's pretty slim evidence statistically.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2230
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #5 - 03/29/21 at 03:50:39
Post Tools
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2098
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #4 - 03/29/21 at 03:24:36
Post Tools
Jupp53 wrote on 03/28/21 at 10:22:55:
Dividing this is the problem. It will become more and more difficult in consequence of the technical development.

Chess otb without electronical help.
Correspondence chess with all technical support allowed.
Centaur tournaments.

These are three easy and clear cut ways and everybody interested in each of it is imo a serious lover of the game.

Chess.com and Lichess suffer from the idea to be able to stop engine use in correspondence chess. They are able to detect it often. But it will be always a game of hide and seek with changing winners. I don't know it exactly. But I assume on my level FIDE 2000~ it is meanwhile easy to detect engine use till rapid time control and secure enough till classic time controls.

So most games are secure enough. The problem is more difficult if top levels are touched. Maybe I'm too indolent. What do I care about football players taking drugs? What do I care about bicycle tours accompagnied by well known doping helpers?


The problem is not with Corr chess, or Engine Chess the problem is that many players are not interested in having Engine assisted vs Engine Assisted contest, the problem is they want to use Engine assistance against fellow players to boost their results and ego while pretending they are not and when they get caught they cry and bleat and complain and deny and make excuses and beg for mercy and understanding and forgiveness. I would forgive them but only after a life ban was imposed, the only way I would consider not imposing a life ban† was if a cheater volunteeringly came forward before being caught and confessed his crimes.

Results, prestige, medals, validation once stolen is difficult and in some cases impossible to restore. I see exposure and life bans as important remedies to have at one's disposal in dealing with this scourge along with the stripping of any held titles etc. of course.

  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2098
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #3 - 03/29/21 at 03:15:58
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 03/28/21 at 05:04:16:
TopNotch wrote on 03/27/21 at 23:56:07:
Point 6 is particularly troubling as FIDE is about to introduce so called hybrid tournaments, where players will be able to compete for 'OTB' IM & GM norms. Online engine cheating has already spiralled out of control and I shudder to think what the implications of introducing 'Hybrid' rated tournaments will mean for the integrity of our game.


Not sure about your objection here. Are you confusing Hybrid chess with Centaur chess? Hybrid chess refers to a player using a DGT board in the presence of an arbiter, with the opponent doing the same thing in a remote location. I would rate the risk of cheating to be somewhat higher than a typical OTB tournament, but astronomically lower than the online tournaments currently being held. Basically the only way to cheat is to have a corrupt arbiter, but even that might not be sufficient to get away with it.


If the arbiter is from the same country and that country has a vested interest in gaining more titled players, then it is a serious conflict of interest and just the appearance of a conflict of interest is a problem. Moreover most of the cheating does not happen directly in front of the Arbiter, usually outside assistance is involved or some sort of Restroom shinanigens so a DGT board and the presence of an arbiter is irrelevant to this argument.

What is more pertinent is that the Opponent in a Hybrid match is in a remote location, and it is the opponent who has the most to lose when facing a cheater. In most cases it is the opposing player or players protecting their own self interests that eventually lead to these cheaters being caught, Arbiters for the most part have no skin in the game and many really couldn't care less.
« Last Edit: 03/29/21 at 07:07:52 by TopNotch »  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jupp53
God Member
*****
Offline


be

Posts: 976
Location: Frankfurt/Main
Joined: 01/04/09
Gender: Male
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #2 - 03/28/21 at 10:22:55
Post Tools
Dividing this is the problem. It will become more and more difficult in consequence of the technical development.

Chess otb without electronical help.
Correspondence chess with all technical support allowed.
Centaur tournaments.

These are three easy and clear cut ways and everybody interested in each of it is imo a serious lover of the game.

Chess.com and Lichess suffer from the idea to be able to stop engine use in correspondence chess. They are able to detect it often. But it will be always a game of hide and seek with changing winners. I don't know it exactly. But I assume on my level FIDE 2000~ it is meanwhile easy to detect engine use till rapid time control and secure enough till classic time controls.

So most games are secure enough. The problem is more difficult if top levels are touched. Maybe I'm too indolent. What do I care about football players taking drugs? What do I care about bicycle tours accompagnied by well known doping helpers?
  

Medical textbooks say I should be dead since April 2002.
Dum spiro spero. Smiley
Narcissm is the humans primary disease.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1170
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Guerrillas Gambit Style
Reply #1 - 03/28/21 at 05:04:16
Post Tools
TopNotch wrote on 03/27/21 at 23:56:07:
Point 6 is particularly troubling as FIDE is about to introduce so called hybrid tournaments, where players will be able to compete for 'OTB' IM & GM norms. Online engine cheating has already spiralled out of control and I shudder to think what the implications of introducing 'Hybrid' rated tournaments will mean for the integrity of our game.


Not sure about your objection here. Are you confusing Hybrid chess with Centaur chess? Hybrid chess refers to a player using a DGT board in the presence of an arbiter, with the opponent doing the same thing in a remote location. I would rate the risk of cheating to be somewhat higher than a typical OTB tournament, but astronomically lower than the online tournaments currently being held. Basically the only way to cheat is to have a corrupt arbiter, but even that might not be sufficient to get away with it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 2098
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Guerrillas Gambit Style
03/27/21 at 23:56:07
Post Tools
The below comments were made by one of our more controversial members in a by now infamous and locked thread. Nevertheless, while I agree that many of his posts are combative, some of his points still remain salient:

"(5) After Kasparov lost to Depp Blue in 1997, it became clear that humans should play humans and computers should play computers. Point is, a machine has a database programmed and can think faster, while a human cannot.  Likewise, the prevalence of chess engines has taken a lot of fun out of correspondence chess. This is because some 1500 can use a chess engine to win games, with people being none the wiser.

(6) I have seen chess sites where cheaters have been banned by the thousands. Why do you think I am distrustful of correspondence chess to a certain extent? Because there is the possibility that you are not playing against a human but against his computer!!

So, there you have my responses. If you want to play me in an OTB  game, say G/30 on Internet Chess Club or some other site, let me know.

Thank you for your attention."

Point 6 is particularly troubling as FIDE is about to introduce so called hybrid tournaments, where players will be able to compete for 'OTB' IM & GM norms. Online engine cheating has already spiralled out of control and I shudder to think what the implications of introducing 'Hybrid' rated tournaments will mean for the integrity of our game.

The CEO of Chess.com, IM Danny Rensch has stated that if people knew not only how rampant but also who engaged in online cheating it would shock them to the core. Many caught  cheaters still enjoy anonymity, and in my opinion that needs to change if online tournaments are to stand any chance of legitimacy.

Some of the titled players that have been caught and banned: Tal Baron; Tigran Petrosian; Akshat Chandra; Maxim Dlugy; Igors Rausis; Nigalidze Georgiadis; Sťbastien Feller <--- (This guy should have been banned for life for sure) In general the punishment for offenders continues to be way too slight, so until that changes the cheating trend will continue to rise. By the way the number of GM's and IM's that have been caught cheating in Titled Tuesday and other online events is scary according to Danny Rensch, and it's not isolated to any one Gender, for instance if anyone deserves a life ban it would be Patrycja Waszczuk  see full story here:  https://chess24.com/en/read/news/17-year-old-european-chess-champion-gets-2-year...

We simply must stop coddling these serial offenders.
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo