Details about the events at Aeroflot Open
letter by Shakhriyar Mamedyarov
Translated and provided by Chessdom
Following the chess media, I noticed that there are a lot of things about the game with GM Kurnosov that are still unclear and I would like to bring some clarification. After the end, I once again carefully reviewed the games with GM Kurnosov played up to round 6 and afterwards as well. As a result there are facts. In the second round in the game Onischuk – Kurnosov, Onischuk applied a novelty on move 13 and after this move until the end of the game (27 moves total), Kurnosov makes moves strictly from the first line of Rybka and wins in a beautiful style.
Two rounds after he again has black and again it is a Gruenfeld in the Moiseenko – Kurnosov game. Moiseenko makes a novelty on move 12 and again until move 25 Kurnosov plays the first line of Rybka. But in this game he could not win as Moiseenko had a very simple position without risks. But I also think that the latest position of the black could play to win…
In the 6 th round, against me Kurnosov plays again and wins playing on the first line of Rybka. In all the three games, very few moves were made on the second line of Rybka. In my game and Onischuk’s game we sacrificed pawns, and in such positions the computer needs several moves to build good defence and wins thanks to counterattack.
Thus, in the 8th round after Kurnosov was under close scrutiny of judges and chess fans, he played at a very low level and suffered a defeat. And it seems to me that this is clear indication that Kurnosov used a computer program, leaving the tournament hall practically after every move and having such confidence in himself declining a draw offer at move 14 against me in a practically equal position.
I hope that all of these details will be analyzed and understood by all chess fans I have no doubt that in the future, organizers of tournaments will take into account such nuances, that affect negatively the image of chess.
Shakhriyar Mamedyarov,
March 2009
Just my 2 Cents:
I personally don’t believe that Kurnusov cheated, simply because he would lose too much by being caught; and if he really wanted to cheat then he wouldn’t do it so stupidly and walk out of the hall so often. As he’s a strong GM he would only need to ‘consult’ a strong computer engine maybe once or twice during a critical phase of a game in order to gain an advantage over his opponent. He would’t need to do that at every move.
However, I also think that tournament organizers have to take measures not only to prevent cheating, but also to prevent CHEATING ACCUSATIONS.
Cheating accusations tend to create ‘Loch Ness Monsters’ and will do harm to innocent players for their whole career.
Just look at the ‘toilet gate’ affair that was created by Topalov/Danailov in Elista 2006 when Kramnik was accused of cheating; the accusations were completely made up (how could Kramnik have utilized a cable behind the toilet ceiling at all???) and it was CONFIRMED by Topalov in his book on the match that it was IMPOSSIBLE for Kramnik to use that cable and that the pure existance of the cable was used to make a point about the unprofessional organization rather than about Kramnik cheating.
However, the accusations still stick with Kramnik as do the accusations against Topalov in San Louis 2005 and Wijk an Zee 2007.
Here’s the solution:
Shared Restrooms instead of separate restrooms;
Nobody is allowed to walk out of the playing hall and smoking is of course NOT ALLOWED during play.
Why anybody should be allowed to smoke during play at all escapes me anyway…
This is no proof, this is still only speculation. I don’t think that much publicity should be given to such letters…
This is no proof, this is still only speculation. I don’t think that much publicity should be given to such letters…
Tuesday, March 10, 2009 8:46:00 AM CDT
+1
Im with Mamed i went over the game with Rybka as well and kurnusov play looks suspicious ,thats unfortunate for the game of chess.The professional players arent really being economically compensated for their work and perhaps this is the underlying motive for computer cheating in general.I’ve begun the process of bringing a new style tourny to America to eliminate theses type of problems, im not sure how goichberg and the boys will be but we can go around them if necessary.
At the level of GM, it is not so surprised that the GM can find a line as that found by computer.
Accusation without proof should not be supported.
GM Shakhriyar Mamedyarov should face a ban from FIDE for his shocking behaviour and unproven accusations.
What a very poor example of sportsmanship Mamedyarov has shown.
Here’s the solution:
Shared Restrooms instead of separate restrooms;
Nobody is allowed to walk out of the playing hall and smoking is of course NOT ALLOWED during play.
You can strap them to their chairs and blindfold them, but as long as unsubstantiated accusations are taken seriously, they will be made by sore losers.
WTG Mamedyarov!!!
Keep complaining until the cheater Kurnusov gets banned or no more invites to tournaments!!!
It seems like Kurnusov has enough defenders to balance the discussion, even though I have yet to see his own voice in this. Mamedyarov left a tournament he was leading because he was convinced that his opponent was cheating. This is a dear price to pay, and he would not have done this if he did not believe that there was substance to his claims.
Anti-cheating is a big activity in the sports world, with top sportsmen having to inform doping controllers about their whereabouts 24 hours a day. Because of these intense efforts accusations of cheating carries less weight. Still they are widespread, and nobody tries to have anyone banned for speaking his opinion. You are butchered in media for insubstantial claims, yes, but you are not banned. It is the responsibilty of media to have a balanced discussion, not to repress it.
Mamedyarov must be in his full right to point out that his opponent has played Rybka lines. This point is provable. Even though it is possible that a player might play this identical line, it is remarkable enough to warrant discussion and closer investigation.
It must be the responsibility of organizers to facilitate a control regime where they with some confidence can say that this was a coincidence. Especially when, as Mamedyarov did, he informed the organizers about his suspicions already during the game.
About the cheating accusations against Topalov and Kramnik, I cannot see how they careers have suffered. Commentators have, as here, balanced the discussion.
Kurnosov is 3,5/4 at the europian ,has someone checked with rybka his games there, it would be interesting
“Just my 2 Cents:
I personally don’t believe that Kurnusov cheated, simply because he would lose too much by being caught”
I disagree. Why do baseball players, athletes take performance enhancing drugs when the price is too high if they r caught?
Is this guy a total idiot? Has anybody actually found any PROOF that Kurnusov cheated? Did anybody catch Kurnusov with an illegal device? Did anybody SEE Kurnusov do anything illegal?
This idiot Mamedyarov should have continued with the tournament anyways. He had an obligation to the organizers and to his prospective opponents who were left hanging. The guy is obviously a quitter and a pathetic loser.
Let Kurnusov speak too:
http://letters.chessdom.com/igor-kurnosov
Sometimes my moves copy Rybka too, and I am just a class player. Whats the big deal. These moves arent from the Andromeda Galaxy, just moves on a chessboard.
And when matching moves, you need to specify how long a time frame because as the search hoprizon increases, Rybka moves will change, as its evaluation changes. In some positions the top move will change several times, sometimes back and forth between the same moves.
I bet, by timing Rybka appropriatly, I could make the moves not match, or make someone else’s moves match, like Memydarov.
The only thing that’s clear is that Shak deserves to be suspended for constantly doing end-arounds on the appeals committee abnd trying to decide this with vigilante justice. All he’s doing is demonstrating that he has no confidence that Kurnosov would be found guilty if he pursued it the right way. Seeing his behavior, I don’t have any confidence in that either.
However, the accusations still stick with Kramnik as do the accusations against Topalov in San Louis 2005 and Wijk an Zee 2007.
They do? Is there anybody outside Bulgaria who thinks that Kramnik used a computer in that match? The evidence of the games themselves gives a pretty resounding no.
The organizers should hire a secret group of players watching everything if there’s on-going cheating .
They force us to almost go naked in airports sometimes. I’m sure they could easily enforce electronic verification and then not allow players out of the determined area of play (toilets and smoking areas included, of course, because as far as I know, smoking is not illegal yet). This would solve the problem of all cheating accusations without having to go through this tiresome and somewhat ridiculous debate about “Rybka did this, Rybka did that, etc, etc”.
Bruno
“This is a dear price to pay, and he would not have done this if he did not believe that there was substance to his claims.”
You are assuming that chess players are sane. Think about Bobby Fischer: Brilliant players can be paranoid too.
You are assuming that chess players are sane.
Not necessarily. I just think that you should be able to speak what you strongly believe, without risking a ban. It is the task of commentators to add objectivity. The individual must be entitled to being subjective.