Chess Scandal - the videos

I use a Saitek to refine my openings. and I copy its best lines,

Topalov uses opening lines / traps he found with fritz.

I think if you use 1 program a lot like this you will end up playing like it. I can already match the Saitek c15 moves deep in some lines, there's no cheating there just research.

"... It made a strong impression on me that at some point, when the
position was repeated twice, he thought for about three seconds and diverted..."

That's an old trick, the player thinks he's getting a draw and you switch
moves messing up his train of thought. No computer thinks like that.

The pictures show a crowd of people around him for that blitz game,
he was making no gestures to indicate what was played, his eyes
never left the board and 10 seconds I think is to short to relay a move
to a third party, get a box to give a move and get it sent back.

He has evolved (we as a race are still evolving, forget Darwin and
his time scale, species can evolve in a generation if need be.)
We are witnessing the dawn of a new man.

Either that or the computer is up his bum. 🙂

Originally posted by greenpawn34
"... It made a strong impression on me that at some point, when the
position was repeated twice, he thought for about three seconds and diverted..."

That's an old trick, the player thinks he's getting a draw and you switch
moves messing up his train of thought. [b]No computer thinks like that.

The pictures show a crowd of people around him f ...[text shortened]... )
We are witnessing the dawn of a new man.

Either that or the computer is up his bum. 🙂[/b]

Can't computer chess programs be programmed to avoid draws?

The Instructor

Hi RJ

Yes but I've never known one to play that 'mind trick'.
They do not have your favourite 'P' word in their make up.
They are cold calculating machines.

Also I'm not sure how deep you can set it to avoid a draw.
Would it take a loss before a draw if you set it that way?

I started this thread because Andrew Martin's vid ruined a Blog I was about
to post last week. I posted this addressed to him in the English Forum.

---------------------------------------------------

YouTube

Damn your eyes Andrew Martin I was building a whole blog around this
game and Valeri (Tiger) Lilov's video evidence.

But you have stolen my thunder. I'm tossing the whole thing the bin after
putting in all that work.
Which is a great pity as I had up my sleeve a Tiger chasing a Cheetah joke.

Of course I found a cheaper reasons why Borislav played the moves he did.

Here just before White played Bb5, the move which Valeri says is computer evidence because
every human player with the IQP knows you should never exchange pieces.



I agree with you that not swapping pieces if one has an IQP is not set in
concrete and my rule of thumb would be to keep the Queens on.

However I think both of you are wrong as to why it was played.

(valeri claims it's not a human move, Andrew says it is. I say...)

Boris set at trap using the isolated d5 pawn as bait.



Of course all this is 100% tongue in cheek and I was having great fun
finding 1400 reasons why these move Vlari used as evidence were played,
now alas it has been dumped.

One more example - (I'm not wasting this junk - did I mention my Tiger chasing Cheetah joke?)

Here - White (Borislav) to play.



On RHP I am coaching thousands of players and one big war cry is 'Unprotected Pieces.'

It usually runs:

99% of non-mating combinations are based on an unprotected pawn or piece.
(when you get over 2000 then you can add 'square' but by then I will be of no further use to you.)

I tell them to read the board and look for unprotected pieces and is there is anyway
tactically they can take advantage of them.

I've hammered on this for years giving examples from their games.
Now I'm getting loads of feedback with these lads sending me combo's they would
never have seen had they not been looking at or avoiding unprotected pieces.

When you get a PM from a 1300 player showing you his first genuine combo
and giving you all the credit then it makes your day.

That Valeri lad is not an RHP lad. His Qf3 is naff. Boris is obviously an avid RHP reader.

My RHP lads would see the two unprotected Rooks in the position and play Qd1.

"Two unprotected pieces in any position is a Unicorn playing with a Cyclops - an accident waiting to happen."

Anyone of my 1400 players would know that here...



...White plays Qd1 to protect both Rooks. (a discussion on overloaded Queens comes next week.)




BTW there is a scam going on.

At the end of the article on ChessBase by Valeri there is strategically placed
link to 13 ChessBase DVD's by Valeri at €29.00 a throw.

It's obvious that Borislav and Valeri are in on this together and it's all a
deep ploy to shift some of these unsold DVD's.
(the Tiger working with the Cheetah to trap the Zebras...We are the Zebras.)

Originally posted by RJHinds
I believe that earlier that he had said he played the Houdini computer engine in practice. So from that we know that he has it. If my memory is correct he said he even beat it regularly.

The Instructor

The problem here is that Ivanov matched Houdini 99% of the time. That would seem to lead to an even record against it, not "beating it regularly".

Originally posted by e4chris
I use a Saitek to refine my openings. and I copy its best lines,

Topalov uses opening lines / traps he found with fritz.

I think if you use 1 program a lot like this you will end up playing like it. I can already match the Saitek c15 moves deep in some lines, there's no cheating there just research.

I disagree 100%. You may be able to play it's opening book 15 moves deep by memory, but you'll never match it's tactics.

Ivanov doesn't use just Houdini's openings. He uses it for the whole game. That's a BIG difference.

Originally posted by woodypusher
I disagree 100%. You may be able to play it's opening book 15 moves deep by memory, but you'll never match it's tactics.

Ivanov doesn't use just Houdini's openings. He uses it for the whole game. That's a BIG difference.

Maybe he's cheating? but I don't see any proof.

I think sour grapes outweighs cheating in chess, but maybe he is???

Computers have not only caught up with the best Grand Masters, they've surpassed them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human-computer_chess_matches

In 2004 Hydra, Fritz 8, and Deep Junior defeated a team of Karjakin, Ponomariov, and Topalov 8.5 - 3.5

In 2005 thee same computers beat a team of Khalifman, Ponomariov, and Kasimdzhanov 8 - 4

In 2005 Hydra soundly defeated Michael Adams 5.5 - 0.5

In 2006 Deep Fritz crushed World Champion Vladimir Kramnik 4-2 .
Kramnik didn't win a game but managed 4 draws.

In 2007 Rybka played odds matches vs Grand Masters. It defeated Jaan Ehlvest giving the GM pawn odds. Roman Dzindzichashvili did draw a match with rybka pawn + move odds.

In 2008, Vadim Milov beat Rybka 1.5 - 0.5 with pawn+move odds and 2.5 - 1.5 with exchange odds (while playing black). In two even games, Rybka won 1.5 - 0.5 (Milov had white both games).

In 2009, Pocket Fritz won a category 6 tnmt with a TPR of 2898.

That is as recent as Wikipedia goes.

Houdini and Stockfish both are rated over 3200 elo.

By the way, Borislav Ivanov is a computer programmer. I bet he and his buddies have found a way to transmit moves from Houdini in a way undiscovered as yet by the rest of us. I mean, come on. 99% match? No GM can get close to that.

I use the most scientific way to determine if he cheats. Look at his face. He looks like a snake 🙂

Seriously though, at the Zadar Open 2012 where he mated Croatian grandmasters Bojan Kurajica, Robert Zelchic and Zdenko Kozul and won the tournament, GM Zlatko Klaric said that he believed that Ivanov uses the most common chess tricks, and that he had been accused of cheating in tournaments in Bulgaria and Serbia. "He's just a chess programmer and this is best seen in the game with Jovanic when all 115 moves were the ones selected by the computer, and this is impossible for a human" - said the Croatian grandmaster.

All 115 moves matched Houdini 2. That's compelling enough evidence for me.

Originally posted by woodypusher
I use the most scientific way to determine if he cheats. Look at his face. He looks like a snake 🙂

Seriously though, at the Zadar Open 2012 where he mated Croatian grandmasters Bojan Kurajica, Robert Zelchic and Zdenko Kozul and won the tournament, GM Zlatko Klaric said that he believed that Ivanov uses the most common chess tricks, and that he had grandmaster.

All 115 moves matched Houdini 2. That's compelling enough evidence for me.

he is a goth in some pictures...

when you have 3200 elo progs people will practice against them and pick up there style. Maybe he just has a different (better?) way of studying then other GMs? Edit 115 is a good match though. true.

Originally posted by woodypusher
I use the most scientific way to determine if he cheats. Look at his face. He looks like a snake 🙂

Seriously though, at the Zadar Open 2012 where he mated Croatian grandmasters Bojan Kurajica, Robert Zelchic and Zdenko Kozul and won the tournament, GM Zlatko Klaric said that he believed that Ivanov uses the most common chess tricks, and that he had ...[text shortened]... grandmaster.

All 115 moves matched Houdini 2. That's compelling enough evidence for me.

If that is true, I say he used Houdini somehow.

The Instructor

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi RJ

Yes but I've never known one to play that 'mind trick'.
They do not have your favourite 'P' word in their make up.
They are cold calculating machines.

Also I'm not sure how deep you can set it to avoid a draw.
Would it take a loss before a draw if you set it that way?

I started this thread because Andrew Martin's vid ruined a Blog I was iger working with the Cheetah to trap the Zebras...We are the Zebras.)

"Boris set at trap using the isolated d5 pawn as bait."

That would be quite an ambitious trap against such a highly ranked opponent. That's one even my unranked self would likely have seen.

Originally posted by woodypusher
All 115 moves matched Houdini 2. That's compelling enough evidence for me.

If true I would say that alone meets the threshold of being... "beyond a reasonable doubt"

Originally posted by woodypusher
I use the most scientific way to determine if he cheats. Look at his face. He looks like a snake 🙂

Seriously though, at the Zadar Open 2012 where he mated Croatian grandmasters Bojan Kurajica, Robert Zelchic and Zdenko Kozul and won the tournament, GM Zlatko Klaric said that he believed that Ivanov uses the most common chess tricks, and that he had ...[text shortened]... grandmaster.

All 115 moves matched Houdini 2. That's compelling enough evidence for me.

Look at his face. He looks like a snake

😀