<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.....>

So whilst I cannot know for sure that Kurnosov didn't cheat, the moves themselves would suggest to me that he didn't.>

I think 16. ... Qd6 is looking to me as a rather fishy engine move. It is also decisive move in the game. It must have really shocked Mamedyarov.

It is really speculative to say whether or not would Kurnosov be able to conjure such a move on his own. After all he was a pretty strong GM. The move itself strikes me on the face value as a surprise although obvious threat to take bishop on h6 seems rational reason for the move. It is a little bit harder to see that queen sets up control of important diagonal with that move. It is a "uber" strong tactical move.

The rest of the game looks very normal although Kurnosov played very strong tactical game.

By the way, Mamedyarov responded to Kurnosov's letter:

http://en.chessbase.com/home/TabId/...

However I would be rather caotious about attacking Mamedyarov here since none of us knows what was really happening during the game.

The truth is that they contested a highly theoretical variation, most of which was probably analysed by Kurnosov before the game; I wouldn't even be surprised if he had analysed the final position on his computer before the game.

Once (if) Kurnosov was on his own, it was likely just a matter of converting a winning position with a couple of precise tactical blows, which a player of his calibre could be expected to manage with relative ease. It's not hard to match even the strongest engine when you play out a forced/forcing line.

You don't know the facts.
Kurnosov stated that the move 12. d5 was new to him therefore he did not "analize the final position" whatever that means to you.

According to Kurnosov the moves 12 to 21 were all new to him.

Again, I am not supporting Mamedyarov claim that Kurnosov cheated although I am somewhat curious about his play in Aeroflot in the first 7 rounds (he was leading the tournament by that point).

To know more about the facts would be to check who is correct - was Kurnosov leeaving playing hall after "every move" as Mamedyarov claimed or not.

Some people claimed that he only left to smoke where other smokers were present which is not true as Kurnosov himself said that "couple of times" he went to splash water on his face. So he *was* probably alone on a number of occassions.

The behaviour of player is extremely important here. Was that just ordinary behaviour that did not raise any suspicion or was it something else that simply was not picked up by arbiters? Here it would be important to find out what Moiseenko and Onischuk, the other two "offending" parties to the affair have to say.

After all nobody was sanctioned for the affair.

On the question of cheating, it seems to me that over-confidence and a dash of arrogance can result in the defeat of the possessor of these qualities when they have a generally superior skill to one they accuse of unfair play in circumstances when they lose to a supposedly weaker opponent. In the first law of combat in Chinese philosophy, it is said: Never underestimate your enemy, for therein lies your first mistake.

I was at Hastings Chess Congress in 2009 where GM Kurnosov was leading in the open section. I observed that he regularly quit the board during his games. Later as I went for lunch, I found him outside, again, smoking a cigarette. And as I understand, in the Mamedyarov saga, Kurnosov never left the playing hall. In my view Kurnosov seemed a quiet fellow with a gentle disposition and manner. He played a brilliant game against GM Mark Hebden; Ruy Lopez Marshall Defence. Kurnosov was white and defended a sacrificial plan by Hebden. Kurnosov won the tournament.