< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
|Nov-15-09|| ||Nezhmetdinov: I am writing this so that AJ does not have the last word....|
|May-18-10|| ||Golden Executive: < LIFE Master AJ:
The big question still remains whether or not Kurnosov cheated> I agree. There is no evidence of cheating, but the possibility can not be excluded. ONLY Kurnosov knows the real thing, everything else is just speculation. Mamedyarov said cheating, Kursonov said not cheating. Some guys here support Mame and some guys support Kurs, i respect both.
|May-19-10|| ||Jim Bartle: I'm waiting until there's one single shred of evidence that Kursonov cheated--other than that he played well. Until then--innocent.|
|May-19-10|| ||Golden Executive: ONLY Kurnosov knows the real thing, everything else is just speculation|
|Jul-24-10|| ||obsesschess: What a crock. A GM makes a few moves out of theory that accord with 'God', oh sorry, I mean Rybka, and shatters the ego of a 2700+ super GM playing white and suddenly he is a cheater. |
Plus he had the temerity to have a nicotine addiction and wear a coat in cold weather.
Heard of defence mechanisms anyone? "In Freudian psychoanalytic theory, defence mechanisms are unconscious psychological strategies brought into play by various entities to cope with reality and to maintain self-image."
Sounds like this fits the bill.
|Jul-24-10|| ||goodevans: <Golden Executive: ONLY Kurnosov knows the real thing, everything else is just speculation>|
I disagree. "Speculation" is guesswork without evidence on which to base it. Here we have the game itself as evidence and make our own hypotheses based on our knowledge of chess.
Starting from the assumption that <even cheats wouldn't take the risk to do so unless they really needed to> let's look at the evidence. What we're looking for is novelty that is surprising and requires deep calculation.
Kurnosov claims that <12 d5> was the first move that was new to him. I find that entirely believable.
<12 ... Ne5> - The alternative's don't look particularly edifying so would such a natural looking move be the result of cheating?
<13 ... Nec4> - The most likely candidate for cheating, but in keeping with black's agressive play. Many GMs would choose this move.
<14 ... Rf7> - Forced.
<15 ... Nxc4> - Forced.
<16 ... Qd6> - A novelty and hence a candidate for cheating. But if 16 ... Nxb2 is a better move, is this move likely to be the result of cheating?
<17 ... Rxg7> - Forced.
<18 ... Qf4+> - The most likely move. White was threatening Qe8#.
<19 ... Bf5> - Again, pretty obvious.
<20 ... Bg4> and <21 ... Qd2> - Nice moves, but this short combo shouldn't be beyond the capability of any good GM.
So whilst I cannot know for sure that Kurnosov didn't cheat, the moves themselves would suggest to me that he didn't.
|Jul-24-10|| ||whatthefat: <Golden Executive: There is no evidence of cheating, but the possibility can not be excluded. ONLY Kurnosov knows the real thing, everything else is just speculation. Mamedyarov said cheating, Kursonov said not cheating. Some guys here support Mame and some guys support Kurs, i respect both.>|
There is no evidence that you are a criminal, but the possibility can not be excluded. ONLY you know the real thing, everything else is just speculation. I say you're a criminal, you say you're not a criminal. Some guys here support me and some guys support you, I respect both.
|Jul-24-10|| ||unsound: The fact that it would be pretty much impossible to prove the negative beyond any shadow of a doubt is only one more reason why Mamedyarov should be ashamed of himself (and punished) for making the accusation in the first place. But anyway, in the absence of any evidence, I assume people are familiar with and sympathetic to the idea of the presumption of innocence.|
|Sep-06-10|| ||freakclub: If one looks at other games of Igor Kurnosov, one will rule out the possibility of cheating here.|
Unless, of course, if he also cheated in his other "notable" games, as featured here on CG. Which is very unlikely.
|Mar-05-11|| ||perfidious: <jafar> Would likely tell us that Kumosov cheated in every game here-if his name were, instead, Carlsen.|
|Mar-17-11|| ||Gawk: Rybka, as a strong chess engine, plays good moves. In order to beat a 2700-rated player, one has to make good moves. Therefore, by the transitive property, in order to beat a 2700-rated player, one must cheat.|
How do you explain that, Mr. 2600?
|May-07-11|| ||perfidious: <Gawk: Rybka, as a strong chess engine, plays good moves. In order to beat a 2700-rated player, one has to make good moves. Therefore, by the transitive property, in order to beat a 2700-rated player, one must cheat.
How do you explain that, Mr. 2600?>
How, then, would the 2970 player who has dominated this thread explain away losing to Nakamura?
Oh, yes.....I remember now......the kid cheated........ so saith the <Life Naif>.
|May-11-11|| ||Peligroso Patzer: <chancho: But why leave [the board] after every move. Either that was a psychological ploy, or something else.>|
Speaking from personal experience (since that is what I know best), back in the day when even local tournaments typically had reasonable time controls (e.g., primary of 40/2), as soon as the game got out of book and into the thinking stage (until time pressure became a factor), I would regularly leave the board and take a stroll after every move I played to relieve nervous tension, so Kornusov's behavior does not seem at all suspicious to me on its face.
If Kornusov ever walked away from the board during this game whilst his clock was running (i.e., after Mamedyarov had moved) that would raise suspicions (but stil would be far from conclusive).
|May-12-11|| ||perfidious: <Peligroso> It was typical for me, also, to walk about when it was my opponent's move, and so long as a player stayed in the playing hall, I wouldn't take this as prima facie evidence of anything untoward going on.|
|Feb-01-12|| ||PhilFeeley: <Peligroso Patzer: <chancho:> Read the accused's explanation:|
<I believe that every chessplayer, regardless of titles or ratings, should have respect for himself and his colleagues, and should not make accusations of computer use, without any foundation or evidence whatsoever. Especially when they have played the game quite weakly! Mamedyarov's claim, that I left the playing hall after every move, taking my coat with me, and went into the toilet, does not correspond with the facts. During the first twelve moves, which we played quite quickly, I did not once leave the hall. Whilst my opponent was thinking for 40 minutes over his 15th move, I twice went to the smoking area, which was located just two metres from the door into the hall, and where there were always quite a few other players, arbiters and also security guards. I also several times went and splashed cold water over myself, without ever speaking to anyone. Neither before, nor after, the protest did the arbiters show any unusual interest in me, as claimed in the press. I behaved exactly as I always do. Whilst my opponent is thinking, I find it easier to think about the position whilst walking round, without looking at the board. As far as I know, most other chessplayers do exactly the same. >
Sounds reasonable to me. Anyone know if this has been resolved? Did Mamedyarov apologize?
|Feb-21-12|| ||HectorChess: I believe that Igor Kurnosov was just having a good tournament. He's a GM after all.|
|Apr-30-12|| ||Abdel Irada: On cursory examination, it seems to me that white's 16. d4 was overreach, and black simply ably exploited the weaknesses it created. It is not unheard of for leading GMs to be possessed by suicidal excesses of ambition, and in this case ambition was punished as grievously over the board as another case of historical ambition was punished in the Forum on the Ides of March.|
Perhaps white should calmly recapture on e4 rather than push for an instant knockout?
|Apr-30-12|| ||Abdel Irada: On the question of cheating, I would advise a look at Aleskerov-Sanikidze 2005, in which white's premature KO attempt 15. h4 was met with the same thematic defense. If, therefore, Kurnosov consulted a computer here, we must assume that Sanikidze did the same four years earlier.|
|Oct-02-12|| ||Blunderdome: Great game by GM Kurnosov.|
|Oct-10-12|| ||Jafar219: Time proved that Kurnosov is fu**ing cheater.|
|Oct-10-12|| ||perfidious: Gawd, why must this be revisited by <Jafar219>?|
Here's a song from long ago on the pop charts: 'The Cheater', by Bob Kuban and the In-Men.
In a piece of supreme irony, the man who fronted the group was murdered by his wife's lover.
|Oct-10-12|| ||parisattack: I'm a big Shak fan, but don't think Kurnosov was cheating. Grunfeld's are like this - lots of pieces on the board + open lines = surprises. I'm thinking of a couple Fischer games...|
|Oct-12-12|| ||Jafar219: <parisattack>, "Apparently Kurnosov was leaving the board and taking his jacket with him EVERY MOVE." - What do you think? is this normal?|
|Nov-01-12|| ||perfidious: < obsesschess: ....A GM makes a few moves out of theory that accord with 'God', oh sorry, I mean Rybka....>|
Dayum-there's someone out there who can spell God. That bit of knowledge brightens my day. Isn't another variant of God spelt Houdini?
<....and shatters the ego of a 2700+ super GM playing white and suddenly he is a cheater....>
There is one person (whom I shall not name) here who believes that any time he loses a game online, his opponent had computer assistance.
<....Plus he had the temerity to have a nicotine addiction and wear a coat in cold weather.....>
I'm telling you, that takes one hell of a nerve.
|Jan-17-13|| ||dumbgai: Jafar219 sounds a lot like AJ Goldsby. A peculiar combination of imbecile and troll.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·