The following was published by our friends at Chessdom:
Letter From Grandmaster Igor Kurnosov
response to the letter published by Shakhriyar Mamedyarov (sent to e3e5.com)
Grandmaster Igor Kurnosov sent a letter to the popular chess portal e3e5.com as a response to the letter published by Shakhriyar Mamedyarov:
“Dear colleagues and chess fans! In response to the letter circulated in the press by Shakhriyar Mamedyarov, I have to clarify the situation. I suggest you take a look at the game Mamedyarov-Kurnosov from round six of the Aeroflot Open, together with my brief comments. 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.f3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nb6 6.Nc3 Bg7 7.Be3 0-0 8.Qd2 Nc6 9.0-0-0 f5 10. h4 fxe4 11.h5 gxh5 – A well-known theoretical position, which I believe, favors black. Here my opponent made a move that was new to me – 12.d5 Ne5 13.Bh6 Nec4. I have also considered Rf7, but I did not like that, after taking Rh5, the Knight loses tempo [13 … Rf7?! 14.Bxg7 Rxg7 15.Rxh5] 14.Qg5 Rf7. The only move 15.Bxc4. This seemed questionable to me, even though objectively it is not bad. 15 … Nxc4. After the 40-minute thought on the previous move, my opponent offered a draw. But I felt that I had serious advantage and didn’t see the grounds to accept the draw.
16.Rd4? – I thought that Qd6 would give me strong initiative. It turned out that Nb2 led to decisive advantage, but this move I had not considered. Imagine what would be the story had I previously analysed this variation at home!? 16 … Qd6?! 17.Bxg7 Rxg7 – The only move! 18.Qxh5 Qf4 + – Also unique, the checkmate was threatening and the Knight was in danger. Now I invite all qualified chess players to set this position and withing three minutes find the next three simple moves for Black! I believe most if will be forced! 19.Kb1 Bf5 20.fxe4 Bg4 21.Nge2? loses immediately! [21.Qh6 Qf2] 21 … Qd2! 0-1.
Black is in winning position. Here the opponent stopped the clock and, without shaking my hand or signing the formular, reached out to the arbiter’s table. The rest of the story you already know… I believe that all players, regardless of title or rating, should respect themselves and their colleagues, instead of blaming them on computer assistance without reason. At the same time playing relatively weak!
Mamedyarov’s claim that I took the coat and went to the toilet after each move, does not correspond to reality. On the first 12 moves, which we played relatively fast, I did get up from the table. When my opponent thought for 40 minutes on the move 15, I went twice to the smoking area which is only 2 meters from the hall entrance, and always full of players, arbiters, there was also a guard. And on few occasions I went to wash my face with cold water, but I never talked to anybody while doing so. The arbiters had no pretensions towards me, either before or after the protest.
Thereat, I simply did what I always do. While opponent thinks, it is much easier for me to contemplate about the position while walking and not looking at the board. As far as I know, most players do the same. Unfortunately, all this negativity affected my play later in the tournament … I would also like to thank all those who supported me on the Internet or in private conversation!
I would suggest:
1. Organizers of major tournaments to equip the entrance of the playing area with metal detectors and other means which would exclude the possibility of assistance, and would eliminate all baseless accusations and insults, which affect the image of the player.
2. International chess organizations to develop a set of rules that would execute serious sanctions for those who use assistance, as well as for those who unjustly accuse the others of receiving the aid!
GM Igor Kurnosov, 28.02.2009
Fair enough. Sounds like a very reasonable explanation.
I propose at least a 1 year ban for making false accusations.
Actually a pretty calm response!
I’d suggest also a limit on getting up and moving around – let’s say one bathroom/smoking break per hour of play. No other competitive activity tolerates unlimited leaving of the area of play.
I believe Kurnosov. I think Mamedyarov has crossed the line here.
I see nothing unusual in this game, or in the bahaviour of smoking/bathroom breaks. A cheating accusation needs more to go on than a butt-whipping by a GM.
Mamedyarov suspected cheating at move 12 already, and so offered a draw? Paranoid.
I can see this affecting Kurnusov in the rest of the tourny, very distracting. Poor guy!
Kudos to Kurnosov for responding so calmly. These accusations are just terrible.
I myself play pretty quickly and frequently go for s stroll, particularly if my opponents take their time pondering ideas.
Imagine my surprise when a few years ago an opponent of mine mentioned after the game that he thought I might be cheating!
Totally insulting, and not only because I even lost that game. Such remarks really deserve punished, they are insulting.
This is EXACTLY how Kramnik described his victories over Topalov in Elista ! Almost word for word ! Well, we all know the truth there, with Danialov’s analysis of Kramnik using Fritz and the wires in the Kramnik bathroom. And look how Kramnik really plays away from the USSR and the KGB – pathetic.
I hope the manager of Mamedyarov goes in and takes the Aeroflot Tournament Hall apart piece by piece – or maybe gets Danialov to help in the investigation.
It is so sad Chess is tainted by these sophisticated cheaters and the public so easily duped. Thank goodness people like Mamedyrov and Topalov confront it and root it out.
Anon @ 11:28 am: either you are joking (good one) or you have no idea from chess at all (sad).
Did you really follow the games between Topalov and Kramnik? Topalov had winning positions in the initial games but blew them, how could that possibly be Kramnik’s fault?
These wild allegations, particularly by people who have no idea of what really happened, are just sad. Do some research before you write crap like that again…
There should be rules to prevent players from suspiciously going to the toilet many times… Its a psychological trick to mess your opponents mind and win the game unfairly. Either Kurnosov has a bladder problem or he is a devious player who uses tricks to win and should be banned for life.
You people are really messed up. Getting banned for life because he does not remain at the board at all times. Don’t you hear how absurd that sounds?
How many times would it be OK to walk to the restroom? Or a stroll? Should we use diapers for adults instead? You are working for Pampers, mmh?
There is nothing wrong with leaving the board, after all you are also risking that your clock will tick down will you are away from the board.
“How many times would it be OK to walk to the restroom? Or a stroll? Should we use diapers for adults instead? You are working for Pampers, mmh?”
That is a great idea! For a tie-breaker the player with the most shit in his diaper wins!
Topa would then be guaranteed to win all of the time as we all know he is very full of shit.
The solution to the problem is very simple.
1. Playing-Hall: there is no leaving the playing area and there is no smoking during the game in progress allowed.
2.Bathrooms: One shared bathroom for male and another one for female players adjacent to the playing hall, that’s it. And inside the bathrooms all doors are removed, so there is no hiding from others possible.
The same baseless accusations are still made against Kramnik and now Kurnosov. Pathetic accusations without any proof. Show us the proof or quit slandering people!
Haha, Kurnosov’s calm response is cool! Now Mamedyarov lost 0-2 in this game.
Everyone on the circuit knows that Kramnik (helped by the Russian KGB) cheated during his match with Topalov.
A Mossad agent has given the proof in an Israeli newspaper.
Anyone can check it out.
FOr people who play chess, and are into logic?, it seems a back-to-front way of looking at things: i.e., to avoid accusations of cheating, people seem to look firstly to curtail the liberties of others. “He may cheat so have only one toilet break per hour…only one smoking break per hour”???
Instead, why not have the conditions so that wherever one goes, not being chained to a board for hours on end, there is such coverage that there is no way that cheating could be contemplated. Would that not be better? Democracy takes into account the majority as well as the minority. Why force a one size fits all rule when one can more easily set down the conditions where there is no semblance of cheating?
On an aside: really, would a 2600 GM need to go out to a computer after every move? Is the memory of a GM that impaired?
In recent cases, the accusers have been Bulgarian, Latvian and Azeri: perhaps the cultural mores away from the West/”innocent till proven guilty”/awareness of libel and or slander/general abruptness in dealing with people, all shows up in how people deal with each other. Perhaps this is an educational/cultural thing?
Cheating is cheating.
Accusations without foundation are another matter.
(This blog seemed more sympathetic in the Latvvian “lip blam” fiasco to the accused, than in this case to the accused Russian GM.)
Hopefully, the accusers can look into themselves rather than the opponent for their own failings.
How many of these accusations (notably these three cases mentioned) have yet actually produced a guilty party?
Can a “sport” survive like this? Or will the FIDE head need to keep pumping his own monies in? A recent match over 8 games – why so short? Couldn’t they get sponsors falling over themselves to be a party to the match?
Does Phelps stop swimming midstream because an opponent is going faster and he thinks it’s not kosher? no.
Again and yeahhhh, I know it’s Shakespeare, but the fault is in the person, not in the stars…
the comments since Aeroflot show why chess will be a miniscule thing in getting sponsors/being marketed – aside from FIDE’s own problems…the mentality is too backward amongst many players and amongst the body politic that represents it…
all that brain work for a few dollars…sad
Last comment: if this had “gone down” in the US, with litigation being what it is (“careful, your cuppa coffe could be hot”, the Sharon Osbourne case, etc, etc, etc) could the accused have been sued? The accuser claiming, err, dunno, mental distress/loss of earnings/damage to reputation, name, brand/blah, blah, blah)
“intentional infliction of emotional distress”
LOL
G’night and goodluck