Stephen Moss

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Well, I suppose that is one business model to capitalise on the Netflix-Queen's Gambit popularity... (i.e. generate inflated strength by cheating online, then set up as a chess coach - either intentional or as an afterthought?).

[Matt Bridgeman]

Well I reported him to Super Prof- fecking idiot!

[JustinHorton]

May also have breached ASA rules, I guess

[Chris Goodall]

Do you see no difference between cheating in online:

• Unrated casual games
• Rated games where all that is at stake is rating points
• Organised tournaments with titles at stake
• Organised tournaments with no prize money
• Organised tournaments with prize money

To cheat in an organised tournament with prize money is to commit the actual real life crime of obtaining a valuable security by deception. The crime Major Ingram was extremely guilty of.

Cheating in a friendly tournament is like a golfer in the club championship moving their ball. The punishment is to be the object of ridicule and to be watched like a hawk in case you do it again. It would not be grounds to ban you from trying to qualify for the Open, because we assume you understand that the Open is more serious business than the club championship, and because you won't get away with it anyway.

[Paul Cooksey]

I see no difference between a) banning someone from OTB chess because they cheated at online chess, and b) banning someone from OTB chess because they cheated at (online) FIFA 22.

Any form of online chess? Do you see no difference between cheating in online:

• Unrated casual games
• Rated games where all that is at stake is rating points
• Organised tournaments with titles at stake
• Organised tournaments with no prize money
• Organised tournaments with prize money

Can I classify as Professional Competitions, Amateur Competitions, and Casual? Admittedly with different levels in each.

I'd argue is possible for online and OTB chess to be in all three categories. Also FIFA22, which as I understand it isn't the biggest eSport, but probably thinks it is bigger than chess.

I think Stephen thought he was playing casual chess. That does exist, we can all agree with a friend to do what we like outside competitions. But actually I think Stephen was on the bottom rung of Amateur Competitions and he did do something wrong.

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi,

I was thinking maybe Stephen was accessing an online database after each move by his opponent to follow theory and as soon as his opponent played a non-theatrical move or the D.B. stopped Stephen took over. (consulting an opening database or opening book is allowed at RHP. Some sites even allow the use of engines for the whole game.)

At least that is what I thought Stephen did, it's not too clear what he was doing. But he is correct in saying he would not get caught. If he was following main line theory and took over when it stopped then any cheat hunter would skip past the known theory moves.

And although this article under the current climate was like flying a kite in a thunderstorm If appears Stephen was guilty of nothing more then slightly misleading his readers. No stones from me there. I do it all the time!

[JustinHorton]

it's not too clear what he was doing.

If appears Stephen was guilty of nothing more then slightly misleading his readers.

"I don't know what he was doing, but I'll say something contrarian anyway"

[Brian Egdell]

Geoff, the article in The Guardian made it perfectly clear that an engine, not an openings database, was being used for the first 15 moves of the games, regardless of whether the opponent's replies were "non-theatrical". Further admissions here in this thread revealed that the games were rated ones against random opponents. There is no need to muddy the waters with speculation.

[Matt Mackenzie]

Geoff, the article in The Guardian made it perfectly clear that an engine, not an openings database, was being used for the first 15 moves of the games, regardless of whether the opponent's replies were "non-theatrical". Further admissions here in this thread revealed that the games were rated ones against random opponents. There is no need to muddy the waters with speculation.

They quite possibly were, I suppose

[Roger de Coverly]

(consulting an opening database or opening book is allowed at RHP

RHP is played under the rules traditonally used for postal chess.

I could imagine an OTB chess club allowing training games where at least one of the players was leafing through an openings book every move. You would not be allowed to do it in a league or club championship game,

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi Brian,

Just trying to figure why Stephen would invite such feedback. It would appear the lad was getting known moves then gave up after after 15 or so moves.
It was wrong, just trying to give the lad an out. I'll start a new thread.

[JustinHorton]

Just trying to figure why Stephen would invite such feedback

Because some people think it's OK to cheat. Do you need much more than that?

[Geoff Chandler]

Just trying to figure why Stephen would invite such feedback

Because some people think it's OK to cheat. Do you need much more than that?

Hi Justin,

No not much more to add.. I was trying to rescue the guy from the mob. Don't know why I bother, I never get any thanks. All I've succeeded in doing bumping it up to the top topic again. (ah well.....moving on.)

I was looking for a loophole and considering if - hypothetical case, I was playing Giri. (an ace swindler btw in the Smerdon book) at chess.com, I'm white and we got here with me to play.

rnbqkbnr/pp2pppp/3p4/8/3pP3/5N2/PPP2PPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 4

Would chess.com's T& C's allow me to go to here; https://www.chessgames.com/perl/explore ... 2070.32071 and see how Giri handles the 4.Qxd4 line.
Obviously this cannot be done OTB but online, I am not using an engine to get a move nor am I getting an engine evaluation. I am looking at what Giri has played in the past. Is this cheating as in nasty nasty hang him high or is this bending the rules. I am not getting advice from a 3rd. party. In fact you could say I'm getting advice from Giri.

But I see chess.com have it covered; https://www.chess.com/legal/fair-play
"You may use Opening Explorer or other books without engine evaluations in Daily chess only
(not in Online / Live play) " They have added the brackets - it's an afterthought that has closed my loophole.
So no loophole there, it is against their T & C's But is it cheating as in cheating? if you know what I mean.. suppose it is. Yes. (no need to answer that.)

Never read any sites T & C's in full. (who does?) and even though I think online chess is not up there with OTB chess it's wrong to cheat an honest player. It's not on, even in friendly skittles. In fact if it was a friend who cheated v me rather than a complete stranger in a foreign land I'd be quite peed off.

[JustinHorton]

No not much more to add.

If only

[NickFaulks]

I was trying to rescue the guy from the mob.

Very honourable in general I'm sure, just not in this case. The guy in question is a journalist who has no interest in stepping back from his actions and relishes the clicks.