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."

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.

How, then, would the 2970 player who has dominated this thread explain away losing to Nakamura?

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.

<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. >

Here's a song from long ago on the pop charts: 'The Cheater', by Bob Kuban and the In-Men.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCYP...

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.....>