4NCL Online

[Matthew Turner]

Mick,
I think that is a very accurate summary of the current position.

[Adam Raoof]

I think my point, badly made, is that where you have enough data then it is easy to detect outliers, even within a players own games - some would argue that it is possible even within a game.

In the OTB example, did someone eventually figure out how the external consultation was taking place?

Yes, in several examples I can think of it was, predictably, a phone. Even though it wasn't used on every move, it was enough to clearly flag it up as assistance. However I am not sure he would have ever been caught if he had not been caught violating the rules, which led to a search.

[Adam Raoof]

Mick,
I think that is a very accurate summary of the current position.

This is true where you are referring to lichess or chessdot.

It is possible, and indeed I would suggest essential, that all [tournament / serious] games are eventually subject to the Regan process and the results published, unedited. People can make of them what they will - it is all in the public domain anyhow. In practice this is only likely to happen with FIDE rated games at a certain time control or level. Nobody should mention the c-word.

[JustinHorton]

It is possible, and indeed I would suggest essential, that all [tournament / serious] games are eventually subject to the Regan process and the results published, unedited.

How's that going to go with juniors

[Adam Raoof]

It is possible, and indeed I would suggest essential, that all [tournament / serious] games are eventually subject to the Regan process and the results published, unedited.

How's that going to go with juniors

I suspect all participants in events will probably have to sign a waiver, in the same way we already ask them to allow the ECF and FIDE to publish their names, results and grades. Games are in the public domain.

[Mick Norris]

Mick,
I think that is a very accurate summary of the current position.

Thanks Matthew

[JustinHorton]

It is possible, and indeed I would suggest essential, that all [tournament / serious] games are eventually subject to the Regan process and the results published, unedited.

How's that going to go with juniors

I suspect all participants in events will probably have to sign a waiver

Would that actually solve (or even really address) any of the potential problems arising?

But, what we can't do is see the statistical evidence, unless the players asks for this, and chooses to put it in the public domain?

I had the impression that all the disputed bans were those imposed by lichess. Has the 4NCL taken any action on its own initiative using the Regan software?

I wouldn't mind seeing Roger's question answered, if anybody knows.

[MartinCarpenter]

They're at least verifying the bans using it.

As noted above, its likely that Regan's set up is much more conservative than whatever the websites do, so it would be slightly surprising for them to end up taking independent action.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"we suspected one player was cheating in tournaments, and we wanted to see if his excellent performance in the league was equally suspect, so we asked all his opponents to let us have their games. "

This raises an interesting issue. A few years ago, I identified a few players that I suspected kept their grades artificially low so they could play in and win grading restricted events. (I definitely won't name them.) I then played two of them in league matches, expecting a tough time, and found that I won easily and they made hideous blunders. So, were they throwing the league game, to keep the grade low enough, or did they have an off-night?
It would actually be more interesting to see if people performed better in tournaments (where money is available) than in league matches...

[Rhys Cumming]

I think all the discussion of lichess bans is muddying the water somewhat. As has been discussed a lot over the past few weeks, we don't know what goes into their detection algorithm and clearly different people have a different level of trust in an algorithm they cannot know the details of.

However, Regan's system backed up the ban and although a good cheat will be able to make it difficult for even a strong human to determine cheating, even to a lowly player like myself they certainly look suspect. The talk of not knowing what the ban is based on seems incorrect: the 4ncl games were put through Ken Regan's algorithm and this indicated that the games were suspect which seems to be a sensible conclusion.

[Rhys Cumming]

How's that going to go with juniors

I suspect all participants in events will probably have to sign a waiver

Would that actually solve (or even really address) any of the potential problems arising?

But, what we can't do is see the statistical evidence, unless the players asks for this, and chooses to put it in the public domain?

I had the impression that all the disputed bans were those imposed by lichess. Has the 4NCL taken any action on its own initiative using the Regan software?

I wouldn't mind seeing Roger's question answered, if anybody knows.

Yes, it was my understanding that this was fairly clear: all the games were put through the software and it was upheld.

[Rhys Cumming]

I can't think of a more inconvenient time to withdraw your teams than going into the final round of a competition.

Perhaps the management of the 4NCL will have to accept that bans for no stated reason are going to trigger such reactions.

Yes, this is a horrible position for the team captains to be in as well.

You've got a team member - who you quite likely know fairly well personally - being accused of a fairly serious thing.

You can't obviously see why and no one will tell you the actual evidence. Unless they're actually admitting guilt, you're basically morally obliged to defend them quite strongly.

Since there doesn't seem to be much of an appeal process, then what? Withdrawal seems pretty logical.

I strongly disagree with this. Yes you don't know exactly the details of what causes the games to be flagged by lichess, but the idea that there is no evidence being presented is just wrong. Even if you completely ignore the lichess computer assistance designation then the games were put through Regan's software and were upheld by that (and both player and team captain will receive a copy of this report). Clearly if you speak to the player and there are specific reasons why they might be flagged (e.g. if they had some super long prep which could be a reason why in a never seen before position at move 25 they were still making computer moves), then no I don't think you are morally obliged to 'defend them quite strongly'. I have indeed told my teammates that were they to be accused of cheating I would throw them under the bus at the first possible opportunity!

[Matthew Turner]

Rhys,
Correct, So the 4NCL would be looking for a certain z score to unilaterally initiate a ban, but this is very unlikely to be reached because Lichess would initiate a ban before this level was reached. All the games from the 4NCL are put through the Regan software and in the vast majority of cases the Regan software shows there is strong evidence to uphold the Lichess bans. An exception occurs when players are banned for games not played in the 4NCL and hopefully the fair play policy addresses this problem.

[Ian Thompson]

It would actually be more interesting to see if people performed better in tournaments (where money is available) than in league matches...

They might, but it would be making a big assumption that money was the cause of the difference, some other obvious possibilities being:

1. Not playing after being at work all day and being tired as a result
2. Different time limits for games
3. Not wanting to finish the game quickly to get home
4. Putting more effort into FIDE rated games

etc.

[Adam Raoof]

It would actually be more interesting to see if people performed better in tournaments (where money is available) than in league matches...

They might, but it would be making a big assumption that money was the cause of the difference, some other obvious possibilities being:

1. Not playing after being at work all day and being tired as a result
2. Different time limits for games
3. Not wanting to finish the game quickly to get home
4. Putting more effort into FIDE rated games

etc.

I know several players who used to throw their league games - and then win grading-limited events. I suspect money was a factor, but I never understood why their captain didn't chuck them out of the team...