British Online Chess Championships 18th December 2020 to 3rd January 2021

[Kevin Thurlow]

"What do you all propose? I genuinely do not recall a single measure put forward (beyond let's make sure nobody plays serious chess)."

A very fair question, but I probably won't answer it...

To summarize, I think

1) Some people cheat.
2) Providers accuse people of cheating but supply no evidence to support their claims.
3) Organizers using those providers remain silent about what they do about those accused of cheating. I am told that some players have been banned by organizers. There is a reluctance to publish this as there is fear of legal action.
4) "Zoom" and cameras have been touted as an answer to cheating, but it is clear that they are not perfect.
5) I have been trying to play competitive chess for 50+ years. Historically, there has always been bias, with some people being favoured. I have no reason to believe that has changed.
6) Some years ago (before computers played all that well), ICCF took the decision to allow their use in Correspondence Chess. Books were already allowed as "reference sources", and Chessbase (and similar software) were regarded in the same light. Anyway, it was impossible to police use of software. Oddly, ICCF still banned seeking human advice, and it has been rare that they have banned people for doing that. One very rich CC world champion was accused of paying grandmasters to play his games and he never sued the fellow world champion who published the accsuation. When I play CC, I just try to enjoy the game and not worry if the opponent is maybe either using a friendly GM or a bank of computers to play his moves!

So you can play and not worry, or not play.

It may seem bizarre, but I am happy to play Blitz or rapidplay, and CC, but don't want to play classical chess online, maybe because I take that more seriously.

[Roger de Coverly]

6) Some years ago (before computers played all that well), ICCF took the decision to allow their use in Correspondence Chess. Books were already allowed as "reference sources", and Chessbase (and similar software) were regarded in the same light. Anyway, it was impossible to police use of software. Oddly, ICCF still banned seeking human advice, and it has been rare that they have banned people for doing that.

Is there much experience of people who couldn't play chess on their own to any standard at all, being a success under ICCF rules? Or is it that 100% engine reliance can be detected and traps set?

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Is there much experience of people who couldn't play chess on their own to any standard at all, being a success under ICCF rules? Or is it that 100% engine reliance can be detected and traps set?"

That was the case - now it's more difficult. You need to be good enough to play down the engine's main line a few moves because suddenly the assessment can change. Still sometimes, the engine suggests you go Re1, Re3, Rh3, other Re1, then Rhe3 instead of Ree3. But it can be a disaster overruling the silicon beast... There was an ICCF event recently where every game was drawn.

[Ian Thompson]

Is there much experience of people who couldn't play chess on their own to any standard at all, being a success under ICCF rules?

Many years ago, before home computers were available and therefore before strong chess playing programs were available, there were quite a few examples of players with very modest OTB grades playing CC to a high standard. Obviously, you can't rule out the possibility that some of them were getting assistance from strong players, but it seems unlikely all of them were.

I think it's quite likely that some players who aren't very good at OTB chess can play CC very well. The question is how? Is it any more than not having to remember anything because books can be consulted, and having more or less unlimited time to analyse the positions?

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Is it any more than not having to remember anything because books can be consulted, and having more or less unlimited time to analyse the positions?"

Probably - a work colleague (Ian Pheby) was good at OTB chess, but very good at CC. I think he got his CC rating over 2600 at one stage. He spent a long time analysing positions before computer assistance was much good. Also, he didn't have long drives to freezing venues etc. OTB, I was better than him, but at CC, he is much better than me. It's partly style as well - he is a careful, classical player. I'm a bit random and do things because they look interesting, which isn't much good at CC...

[David Robertson]

Danny Gormally withdraws, cites cheating

[John Hodgson]

Not in this tournament, but for some people who might be asked in other tournaments in the New Year to set up a second camera facing at the players back (or wide angle, or whatever they ask for?!) - Are there any tips on budget options, and is it difficult setting a second camera up?

This dilemma cropped up at the European Women's Online Club Cup that started this weekend. Whilst the regulations prohibited laptops (apart from the one logged in to Tornelo) or mobiles in the room the organisers subsequently authorised use of laptops and mobiles to be used as the "side camera". They subsequently communicated that players using only the webcam on their laptop wouldn't be defaulted but would be at far greater risk if fair play checks flagged them.

This doesn't answer your question but it may be worth checking if a second laptop or mobile can be used before breaking the bank on cameras.

I tried to find out the precise rules for the use of cameras but, unable to do so despite several requests for clarity, decided to withdraw from the online championship.

I have a large 'dumb' screen attached to my laptop, which has an internal camera. I use this because it is much easier to see the chess board. The issue is that if someone looks at me I am not looking directly into the camera but at the other screen.

One solution offered was to shut the laptop (this gives a rather uninteresting Zoom picture). Another was to configure Windows so that only one screen is open This is technically possible, but does not resolve the issue that I am looking away from the camera. I also do not see the point since no one will know whether my laptop screen is displaying anything or not.

I did offer to tilt the laptop so that its camera was looking at me looking at the second screen.

Probably I am the only person becoming confused, but I think it might help if the requirements for camera set up were made more precise, and such that even dummies can understand them. If my configuration is 'illegal' then at least I would have known not to enter.

[NickFaulks]

I think it's quite likely that some players who aren't very good at OTB chess can play CC very well.

That is certainly true in my case and there is a good reason for it. I have never been able to keep a position in my head - if I am walking around during a game and you ask me to reconstruct the position on my board ( don't do that, of course! ) I will probably get several things wrong. This means that when trying to analyse a position that I expect to occur in four moves' time, I probably have at least one piece in the wrong place, which can make a difference.

If permitted to shunt the pieces around on a board, I think I would be several hundred points stronger than my proper rating. By contrast, for real players the difference seems to be very small - why else would someone like Shirov spend much of the game staring at the ceiling?

[Roger de Coverly]

Danny Gormally withdraws, cites cheating

Is he complaining about the presence of players rumoured or confirmed to have been defaulted for engine use in previous events? That's another one for arbiters and organisers to chew over. if they accept entries from players of dubious repute, will that cause a knock on protest effect?

[Richard Bates]

Danny Gormally withdraws, cites cheating

Is he complaining about the presence of players rumoured or confirmed to have been defaulted for engine use in previous events? That's another one for arbiters and organisers to chew over. if they accept entries from players of dubious repute, will that cause a knock on protest effect?

I believe it relates to one of the qualifiers, and his... surprising qualification. Apparently there were no cameras in the qualifiers (mainly on the basis that there weren't sufficient resources to police)

[Jonathan Rogers]

Is there any easy way to find the results thus far, let alone any games?

[Ian Thompson]

Is there any easy way to find the results thus far, let alone any games?

http://chess-results.com/tnr543516.aspx ... =0&flag=30

[Jonathan Rogers]

Thanks Ian. I find that the championship line up makes for surprising reading in many respects - even more so than it used to do at its worst ten or so years ago, when half of the field seemed to be under 2150 (but there were financial explanations then).

[Matt Bridgeman]

Thanks Ian. I find that the championship line up makes for surprising reading in many respects - even more so than it used to do at its worst ten or so years ago, when half of the field seemed to be under 2150 (but there were financial explanations then).

The Hastings 12 player all play all rapid 9th and 10th January is a different story, and has a £7500 prize fund;
http://www.hastingschess.com/caplin-has ... ournament/

[Jonathan Rogers]

The games can now be followed on chessbomb, it has pointed out to me. Round 3 is live and is the first round with some interesting pairings: Turner v Fernandez, and Ghasi v Adams. Unfortunately, with the field assembled I don't expect there to be more than a handful of interesting games per round but perhaps others will think differently.