Chess just got another black eye today when a cheating scandal hits the mainstream news. Dylan Loeb McClain, a friend of mine, who is a journalist for the NY Times, published the following article today:
August 8, 2006
Cheating Accusations in Mental Sports, Too
By DYLAN LOEB McCLAIN
The New York Times
Accusations of cheating at the largest tournament of the year have the chess world buzzing — and have tournament directors worried about what they may have to do to stop players from trying to cheat in the future.
The cheating is alleged to have occurred at the World Open in Philadelphia over the July 4 weekend and to have involved two players in two sections of the tournament. In each case, the player was suspected of receiving help from computers or from accomplices using computers. Neither player was caught cheating, but one player, Steve Rosenberg, was expelled. The other, Eugene Varshavsky, was allowed to finish the tournament but was searched before each round, then watched closely during games.
Chess has always been considered a gentleman’s game, with an unwritten honor code. But the advent of powerful and inexpensive chess-playing computers and improved wireless technology has made it easier to cheat.
Although rare, cheating at chess is not new. For years, players who wanted to cheat would leave the board and ask other players for advice, or consult chess books or magazines for suggested moves. Cheating at chess may seem like a twisted exercise in ego gratification, but growing prize money has made the rewards more meaningful. At the World Open, the total prizes were $358,000, with first place in the top section worth as much as $28,000.
Bill Goichberg, the director of the World Open and the Continental Chess Association, an organization that sponsors many big tournaments, said that, if true, the incidents at this year’s tournament were troubling because of the players’ stealth and effectiveness.
“Before, a player might have discussed the position with someone who is a grandmaster,” Goichberg said. “That sounds terrible, but if the grandmaster hasn’t seen your position, I don’t know if that is going to be much help. What is happening now is that the cheaters are concealing the fact that the moves are being transmitted to a computer.”
Goichberg said the older methods of cheating were easier to spot, but there are signs to indicate when someone may be using a computer program. Programs often play sequences of moves that are different from what a player would do, and they rarely make mistakes. Another signal is if a player shows a significant improvement over a short period of time, something that is rare among adult players.
Goichberg said that he became suspicious of Varshavsky at the Open because he displayed those tendencies.
Varshavsky was among the lowest-ranked players in the top section of the tournament. In his first four games, he beat three high-ranked masters and played another to a draw. Then after losing to a grandmaster, he played almost flawlessly to beat another grandmaster in his next game.
You can read the rest of it here. 
I’m against large money prizes for all but the top players. I never played chess for money, just for the challenge and the fun. I think big money prizes degrade chess.
I believe the top GMs definitely have a right to make a reasonable living from chess, so I don’t oppose money prizes per se.
I have played at the hb global (which is the limit of my exposure to big tournaments).
I think there will always be a few bad apples but I think that playing over the board in tournaments is still pretty clean. Compare it to online chess, which is very ugly.
The other day, I asked the speed trap team on icc if they can detect someone playing advanced chess i.e. using computer to make sure that their moves are not tactically flawed. Their answer was that it was very hard :-).
So I prefer OTB tournaments myself. I think they can control cheating in OTB tournaments pretty well.
This reported scenario is the exception not the rule.
But I wish there were more money in OTB chess tournaments. That way there will be more interest in people taking up chess as a hobby.
Regards.
That well known phrase, “Money is the root of all evil”, in my theory, comes from a Bible verse in 1st Timothy (6:10 to be precise) “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, for which some have strayed from the faith in their greediness, and pierced themselves through many sorrows.” By the way, I’d like to recommend to you guys a couple of very nice websites: answersinGenesis.org and thetruthaboutDaVinci.org. I’m sure they will have all the answers that you’ll need to destroy evolution and the ‘DaVinci Code’ theory. Why don’t you guys check them out?
I was at the World Open, and I played Steve Rosenberg. He beat me by playing flawless Fritz moves, and my suspicion was aroused, when, after the game, his comments about the moves were really shallow. He also seemed to be confident that he was going to win almost all the games. He was cheating with the help of a headphones, and was caught at the very last round.
Money is not the problem here. I think more money should be in chess, to attract people. The problem is the exceptionally naive behaviour by the World Open organisers. How can you allow headphones and suchlike stuff at a tournament of this magnitude ? Can you imagine Anand or Kramnik playing with headphones and listening to a walkman ? Also, the organisers were very lenient about people leaving the playing Hall and going to their hotel rooms etc. HB global was much more strict about all all this. People including top players are cheating in all sports, and its naive to expect that chess players will be any different, or exceptionally honest. Also, with today’s technology, there are so many methods of cheating at our disposal. Organisers should stop being naive about this and take appropriate steps.
Another example: Players were given papers containining the notable games of the previous day, and they were allowed to read all that during the game ! What if I happened to play an opening that Kamsky had played the previous day, and copied his opening moves ?
A point to be noted from the article: “Goichberg said the older methods of cheating were easier to spot, but there are signs to indicate when someone may be using a computer program………….”Another signal is if a player shows a significant improvement over a short period of time, something that is rare among adult players”.
Who is to check on Topalov? He was someone who, for number of years, remained under the shadows of big names such as Kasparov and Anand, but suddenly raised to stardom. In addition, there were allegations that he cheated during the San Luis World championship match that went largely unnoticed. Also, why was he seated in the same place while all others were rotated?
This comment is NOT to conclude that Topalov is cheating. That may be outrageous. He could truly be a champion (hope so), but the question is why can’t this same logic be applied to check or test the top players as well? With the hi-tech gadgets available these days, there are ways to cheat repeatedly, which may never be noticed by outdated screening procedures.
With corrupt, obsequious officials in FIDE, things will be under the carpet. What do you expect from an organisation run by a bunch of communists?
Check out Jeff Sona’s site to see where Topalov has been for years: http://db.chessmetrics.com/CM2/MonthlyLists.asp?Params=
Remember: Morality and decency in sports (all areas) have deteriorated significantly in recent years. Sportsmen worshipped as heroes have been found guilty and there were instances when accusations were pushed under the carpet because too much were at stake.
Susan, any comments?
A chess fan who wants the truth!
It seems I am one of the few people on this site who supports Topalov. So I think I will offer some points to defend him.
Regarding Topalov’s recent surge, I suspect that he probably found a way to balance the way he plays chess. Remember Fischer used to constantly lose to Spassky until he made corrections. Was Fischer cheating? Also what about Fischer taking a long break and coming back even stronger.
I think professionals who constantly train peak at different times in their careers. If you also check at the Jeff Sonas site, you will see the variability in which professionals peak. Fischer was best at 29, Alekhine at 35, Karpov close to 40 etc.
Regarding cheating at professional tournaments, I think it is not very hard to scan each player for radio active devices, limit access to hotels, search bathrooms etc.
So I am not that concerned about cheating at that level. But I agree that due to advanced technology one should ensure fairness for the sake of the sport.
Regards.
How high do chess tourney entry fees have to get before it crosses a gray line into being a CHESS GAMBLING event?
The 2005 HB Global event had high fees of $350 for class players: is that high enuf to be gambling?
Should children be allowed to play in chess tourneys that imply a major gambling component?
Gene Milener
http://CastleLong.com/
I believe that there are ways to intercept and/or jam wireless transmissions. These may have to be used, along with more severe penalties, such as blacklisting players who do not fully cooperate with reasonable rules. Possibilities include requiring Positive ID, predisclosure and inspection of hearing aids or other assistive technology, rewards for information, requiring players to sign an ethics agreement, etc.
Finally, in aggravated instances, criminal fraud, conspiracy to commit same, and attempted grand theft charges might have some deterrent value. Prison chess programs may need additional good players!
Here’s a suggestion: any grandmaster who publicly accuses someone such as Varshavsky of cheating without proof is stripped of the title and banned from playing rated events ever. This type of unprofessional behavior cannot be allowed to continue. Why do grandmasters assume they are invincible? Is it the classic lack of maturity and professionalism they all seem to show? Prove Varshavsky cheated, or shut up!! Nakamura has publicly said he believes Varshavsky played fair after watching his games.
As for Goichberg’s idiotic comment “Another signal is if a player shows a significant improvement over a short period of time, something that is rare among adult players”.
I myself improved over 300 points in strength recently (lower sections of play) and think this is pure nonsense. Do I cheat? No. Run my games through fritz and it’ll have a good laugh at my expense.
vvchess, Bobby Fischer would be the last person on earth in my opinion to cheat at chess. He loved and respected the game too much! I read that in one of Fischers matches, Bobby touched a pawn and let go for a mili-second. The GM he played (who I cannot recall his name), commented that this said GM had made up his mind not to object if Bobby moved another piece, but he said Fischer seeing the loss moved the pawn anyway and resigned. The GM said then he knew Bobby was a real gentleman at the board. Ironically Bobby has stated for a very long time that chess games at the highest levels are “pre-arranged” by very intelligent players and teams working with computers who have the ability to memorize entire games and they simply play these games out as if it were was Pro Wrestling. While I believe his allegations are too exaggerated, there are certain truths to Bobby’s statements. For example chess in the last 30 years or so has evolved in such a way that opening theory went from about 15 moves to 25 and more! Some games go from openings right to endgame lol. So computers have a big role in the entire game being played. I also agree with Fischer that alot of these super moves are not being played over the board but in the ‘board room’ if you know what I mean.
billythekid,
I agree with you about Fischer. I was making a point to my previous poster that players make huge surges in their rating at different points in their careers. I used Fischer as an example because they didn’t have computers back then.
“Morality and decency in sports (all areas) have deteriorated significantly in recent years.”
I disagree. Zinedin Zidan.
I think the problem is not in money.
Questions: Many of people are killed in car’s accidents. Is the problem in a car? Next one: Many of people are killed in wars. Is the problem in guns?
My statement is that: Money is not the root of evil. The root of evil is in people.
http://www.uschess.org/assets/msa_joomla/XtblMain.php?201211252412.3
“If I don’t post it, I’m toast. So, I must post it. Forced. Box.
The probability of someone reading it is extremely low. Even if someone reads it, the probability of it being understood is also extremely low. And finally, even if it is understood, the probablity of that someone being in a position to do anything about it is, once again, extremely low.
1/1,000 x 1.1000 x 1,1000 = 1 in a billion.
I’ll take my chances.” — H.T.