New case of cheating in chess?

by Valeri Lilov
4/26/2016 – We use a question mark because the evidence presented by IM Valeri Lilov is circumstantial – no actual pictures of hidden devices or anything. But we cannot forget that Lilov has previously unmasked a notorious cheat in a similar way – a player who has received a life-long ban from tournaments. You can view the evidence presented by Lilov in a 37-minute video and then tell us what you think.

ChessBase 14 Download ChessBase 14 Download

Everyone uses ChessBase, from the World Champion to the amateur next door. Start your personal success story with ChessBase 14 and enjoy your chess even more!


Along with the ChessBase 14 program you can access the Live Database of 8 million games, and receive three months of free ChesssBase Account Premium membership and all of our online apps! Have a look today!

More...

New Cheating in Chess: The Danov Case

By Valeri Lilov – blog post

This article is devoted to a sensitive topic, particularly in chess, one that has been discussed and decided upon for the last few years. The matter to be discussed today is namely chess cheating.

After a spike of tournament cheating cases in recent years throughout Europe and around the world, we have become increasingly sensitive to the sudden displays of extreme genius over the board by otherwise consistently average players. A case of similar kind has been widely covered by me in 2013, which as a result, led to the exposure of the notorious cheater Borislav Ivanov who was further caught in the act and banned permanently.

Now, in my video below, I want to cast some light on a recent case which in some ways resembles Ivanov’s cheating, though this time, the person is much smarter in trying to avoid all the concrete and circumstantial evidence. Certainly, guilt cannot be unilaterally proven without the relevant FIDE anti-cheating measures being put in place for this type of events, but I can at least give you my point of view on how a carefully planned and crafted cheating may lead to a profitable “career”.

The video I am presenting you below gives my hypothesis of the abnormal cheating patterns applied, I hope they give you some food for thought, as well as the ultimate knowledge to decide for yourself on whether this case was a case of cheating or a streak of multiple wondrous coincidences.

Watch this 37-minute lecture and analysis by Valeri Lilov

This analysis of Radi Danov's performance is highly speculative and should be treated with caution. On the other hand Lilov has analysed and subsequently unmasked Borislav Ivanov in a similar way (see links at the bottom of this page). And we learn from other sources of suspicious behavior: Radislav Yordanov Atanasov told us that in the fourth round of the Dupnitsa Memorial Lyuben Konstantino tournament Radi Danov beat Ivaylo Enchev. The arbiters asked to check Danov's shoes, but the player refused, whereupon the result of the game was changed in favor of Enchev, and Danov was expelled from the tournament – which he accepted, rather than allow the checking of his shoes! Reminds us of a well-documented shoe incident in the past.

There are a few other worrying points made in Lilov's lecture: one is that a modern cheat would be well advised to use a substandard engine. This is what we have at the top of the engine list:

Now using one of the 3300+ engines for all your moves is very risky. People will find a very high correlation between the cheater's move and those of top engines. In fact ChessBase 13 has a function that does exactly this.

This will tell you, in a simple one-click operation, how many relevant moves (ignoring openings and simple forced recaptures) coincide with those of the top engines. Over 90% is suspicious, below 50% completely innocuous.

However, as Lilov says: a clever cheater will not use a top engine. He can choose from a hundred engines, all of which have to GM strength – and are usually completely unknown. Lilov also goes so far to suggest that people might use Fritz 5 (and not Fritz 15) and still get sufficient assistance to win the tournament or gain Elo points.

Finally there is a suspicion that players receiving computer assistance might be occasionally using suboptimal lines – ones that retain the win but do not do it with brutal computer efficiency. Kirill Kuznetsov found the following game between Danov and Ukrainian FM Nazar Ustiyanovich suspicious:

[Event "Bulgarian Chess Summer 2015"] [Site "?"] [Date "2015.06.13"] [Round "?"] [White "Danov, Radi"] [Black "Ustianovich, Naza"] [Result "1-0"] [ECO "B07"] [PlyCount "117"] [EventDate "2015.??.??"] 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. f3 e5 5. Be3 Qb6 6. Qd2 Qxb2 7. Rb1 Qa3 8. Bc4 Be7 9. Nge2 Qa5 10. O-O Nbd7 11. a4 Qc7 12. Ng3 Nf8 13. f4 Ne6 14. fxe5 dxe5 15. Nf5 O-O 16. d5 cxd5 17. Nxe7+ Qxe7 18. Nxd5 Nxd5 19. exd5 Nd4 20. Bxd4 exd4 21. Qxd4 Qd6 22. Bd3 b6 23. c4 Bd7 24. a5 Rab8 25. Rb2 Rfc8 26. Rfb1 Rc5 27. axb6 Rxb6 28. Rxb6 axb6 29. Qh4 g6 30. Qd8+ Kg7 31. Qxb6 Qe7 32. Qb2+ Qf6 33. Qxf6+ Kxf6 34. Rf1+ Ke7 35. Ra1 Kd6 36. Ra6+ Ke5 37. Ra7 Bf5 38. Be2 f6 39. Rxh7 g5 40. Re7+ Kd6 41. Ra7 Ke5 42. Kf2 Be4 43. Re7+ Kd4 44. d6 Rc8 45. d7 Rd8 46. Bf3 f5 47. g4 Bd3 48. Bc6 Rb8 {[#]} 49. gxf5 $2 (49. Re8 $1 {"A club player will find this move in a second," Kuznetsov writes. Danov, who has completely outplayed his opponent, has a move rated at +18 pawns, but plays one the computer rates at about +5. It still wins, but the path to victory is more complicated than the simple overwhelming 49.Re8 which immediately gets White a queen.}) 49... Bxf5 50. Re8 Rb2+ 51. Kg3 Rb3+ 52. Bf3 Bxd7 53. Rd8 Kxc4 54. Rxd7 Ra3 55. Kg4 Kc5 56. Rd5+ Kb6 57. Rxg5 Kc7 58. Rd5 Kc6 59. Rd3+ 1-0

"On the one hand this is too little proof," Kuznetsov writes, "and the fluctuations can be explained by his lack of understanding of certain positions. But it is a bit strange, isn't it? Perfect play before the result has been achieved, and then some intentional (?) slips to decrease the cheating accusations." [Source: GM Artur Kogan "No more cheating in chess" on Facebook]

Born in 1991, IM Valeri Lilov, better known as Tiger Lilov, is a professional chess trainer from Bulgaria holding a FIDE rating of 2434. As an active tournament player, Lilov won a number of major international tournaments and championships, including the European Individual School Chess Championship U10, held in Moscow in 2000 and the International Open “Kulaga Memorial,” held in Minsk in 2007. IM Valeri Lilov is famous for his personalized approach to training students and professional players up to the IM level from all over the world.

To date Valeri has recorded 17 DVDs and 60 minute lectures for ChessBase, with subjects like the Austrian Attack, Tactics in the Endgame, How to fight the Queen's Pawn Openings, Secret Weapon Four Knights Game, etc. You can browse for his products in the ChessBase Shop.

At the end of his video on Radi Danov above Lilov says he want to give us an opportunity to think about all this and welcomes comments and opinions in the discussion section below.

Recent ChessBase articles on cheating in chess

Cheating suspicion at the Zadar Open in Croatia
04.01.2013 – In this event, with 16 GMs and a host of other strong players, one participant stood out especially: the 25-year-old untitled Bulgarian Borislav Ivanov scored 6.0/9 points, with a rating performance of 2697. In the January FIDE list Ivanov has gained 115 points over his previous 2277 rating, gained in over 400 games over three years. A certain suspicion once again raises its ugly head.
Cheating scandal in Croatia – feedback and analysis
08.01.2013 – Recently we reported that the incredibly brilliant play by a 25-year-old untitled Bulgarian player at the Zadar Open in Croatia had raised suspicion that he might have been using illicit electronic assistance during his games. A number of readers criticised us – for linking to the mainstream Croatian media reports?! One of them, an expert in the field, actually analysed all the games in question.
Cheating scandal – Borislav Ivanov speaks out
17.01.2013 – Recently a 25-year-old untitled Bulgarian player scored 6.0/9 points in a strong GM tournament, with a 2697 performance. His opponents complained, he was searched, and no electronic equipment was found. Still, the case put chess on the front pages of the mainstream media, and led to intense discussions on the Internet. Now Ivanov has given the Russian news portal WhyChess an exclusive interview.
Cheating scandal in the Bundesliga – readers' reactions
30.10.2012 – It will surprise nobody that there were a very large number of messages that poured in regarding our recent report on the disqualification of a Bundesliga player for carrying a cellphone to the bathroom during his games. Here's a small selection of letters, plus a thoughtful article by Assistant Professor Kung-Ming Tiong of Malaysia, comparing the problem in chess with academic cheating.
Cheating scandal: player disqualified for cell phone use
27.10.2012 – Actually, as the accused player, German GM Falko Bindrich, points out: not for proven use but for refusing to allow the arbiter to examine the phone he had with him during multiple toilet visits during last weekend's Bundesliga round. The rules permit the arbiter to check in case of justified suspicion, and so Bindrich was disqualified and the point awarded to his opponent. Long, compelling read.

Series on the History of Cheating in Chess by Frederic Friedel

A history of cheating in chess (1)
29.09.2011 – Hardly a month goes by without some report of cheating in international chess tournaments. The problem has become acute, but it is not new. In 2001 Frederic Friedel contributed a paper to the book "Advances in Computer Chess 9". It traces the many forms of illicit manipulations in chess and, a decade later, appears disconcertingly topical and up-to-date. We reproduce the paper in five parts.
A history of cheating in chess (2)
04.10.2011 – Coaching players during the game is probably the most widespread form of cheating (rivaled only perhaps by bribery and the throwing of games). Although this practice began long before the advent of chess playing machines, computers have added a new and dramatic dimension to this method of cheating in chess. You will never guess: who were the pioneers of cheating with computers?
A history of cheating in chess (3)
18.12.2011 – In January 1999 the main topic of conversation amongst top players like Kasparov, Anand and others: who was the mysterious German chess amateur, rated below 2000, who had won a strong Open ahead of GMs and IMs, with wonderfully courageous attacking chess and a 2630 performance? How had he done it? Turns out it was with unconventional methods, as subsequent investigation uncovered.
A history of cheating in chess (4)
28.2.2012– Las Palmas 1996: Garry Kasparov is agonizing over his 20th move against Vishy Anand. He calculates and calculates but cannot make a very tempting pawn push work. Immediately after the game he discovers, from his helpers, that it would have won the ultimately drawn position. The point that became clear to him: a single bit of information, given at the top level in chess, can decide a game.
A history of cheating in chess (5)
10.6.2014 – A few weeks ago FIDE took first executive steps to combat the most serious threat that the game of chess currently faces: the secret use of computer assistance during the game. In a paper written fourteen years ago Frederic Friedel had first drawn attention to the dangers that are lurking. We re-published this historical document in four parts. Here is the fifth and final section.

Topics Cheating

Born in 1991, IM Valeri Lilov, better known as Tiger Lilov, is a professional chess trainer from Bulgaria holding a FIDE rating of 2434. As an active tournament player, Lilov won a number of major international tournaments and championships, including the European Individual School Chess Championship U10, held in Moscow in 2000 and the International Open “Kulaga Memorial,” held in Minsk in 2007. IM Valeri Lilov is famous for his personalized approach to training students and professional players up to the IM level from all over the world.
Discussion and Feedback Join the public discussion or submit your feedback to the editors


Discuss

Rules for reader comments

 
 

Not registered yet? Register

RayLopez RayLopez 5/8/2017 03:11
Refusal to take off one's shoes, especially after the Borislav Ivanov incident, is sufficient to suspect this player as cheating. Period, no need for further proof. As for the inferior engine accusation, that's speculative. His refusal to immediately queen is not of itself sufficient evidence since at that point White was so far ahead that any number of ways could have won.

Concerning the Borislav Ivanov incident I'd like to know what the feedback was between the players feet and the device? How do you know what move was played, and how do you input moves? That was never clearly explained. Perhaps indeed a player should be asked to disrobe in the presence of a medical professional if there is a strong suspicion of cheating. In airport security nearly the same is done.
DropkickIggy DropkickIggy 5/3/2016 05:33
"It seems that the moderators have deleted any messages that contain personal attacks/insults and unrelated posts to the article in question."
In that case they should start with lilov!
pepperpots pepperpots 5/3/2016 12:22
@thecentipede It seems that the moderators have deleted any messages that contain personal attacks/insults and unrelated posts to the article in question.
LSI LSI 5/3/2016 12:46
@promo-KC : gambit-man has been using technology and chess engines to detect cheaters on chess.com for many years. He has successfully reported hundreds of players who have been banned for cheating by chess.com

So whatever his blitz rating may be, he is good at finding cheaters and is someone with upmost integrity.

If you doubt gambit-man, just go to chess.com and ask about him in the forums.
promoKC promoKC 5/2/2016 08:20
LSI, I beg you a pardon. A person with a blitz rating below 1500 specialises in finding cheaters?
"The Bulgarian chess federation has banned Danov". Good news! But... since all these fellows prefer to be expelled and banned rather than to expose what they are hiding, the magical device may soon be transferred to somebody else of Bulgarian (?) origin. And that's really ruining the public image of this nice country having strong chess traditions.
BelowZero BelowZero 5/2/2016 02:40
I do not know anything about this case, XXov v. XXov, I probably could not tell them apart if you set them before me!

But will say this, once someone has been caught red-handed, then issue a heavy horse-leather whip to every other player in the tournament, then make the culprit run the gauntlet!

Pretty soon, the cheating epidemic will die down!
promoKC promoKC 5/1/2016 12:02
Absolutely agree. Of course, Danov should not be called a proven cheater after his refusal to undergo the search. Or maybe he should, but we know little about this story yet and can't be that peremptory.
However, "an unpleasant taste in the mouth", as you mildly put it, may have unpleasant consequences for our hero, such as the present article. I think it's totally justified. Please note it is titled "New case of cheating in chess?", not "New case of cheating in chess". And the author welcomes a wide discussion. All in all, I find it highly appropriate and would like to hear something from Danov already.
promoKC promoKC 4/30/2016 09:55
firestorm, thanks for the answers. Finally :). Well, I tend to agree with most of them, however, the main question is answered wrongly. "...by exercising his right not to comply" - he has no such right. Once he signed for the competition, he agreed to all the rules and conditions whatsoever, i.e. the schedule, pairing procedure etc. This includes the anti-cheating measures constituting an essential part of modern chess, that's for sure. And these in turn include the rules of not using mobile phones and allowing to be checked at the arbiter's wish, which (the wish) may and should appear when there are any suspicions or complaints.
promoKC promoKC 4/30/2016 05:52
"Danov needs to answer why he didn't comply with the arbiter's request to check him for means of cheating" seems the only sense-bearing phrase in all the utter crap that followed. firestorm and gambit-man, you fellows definitely don't want to talk about Danov. There is little use in a conversation where one side has no ears. My four questions above remain unanswered, and you keep posting wallpapers on one and only irrelevant subject. I give up. You are free to discuss Lilov among yourselves, I am not interested. Coming back to the issue, I hope that Danov, should he provide no comprehensive explanation of his suspicious and illegitimate behaviour, is banned for the period decided by the respective FIDE authority. All the best, and feel free to enjoy yourself.
KOTLD KOTLD 4/30/2016 11:12
Firestorm, Lilov Senior's 2500 rating was a reference to his online speed chess results / rating. It was never an official FIDE rating, at long time limits. I agree it was very deceptive promotion ("false advertising").
promoKC promoKC 4/30/2016 08:00
gambit-man, it' rather hard to make you understand the point.
All right, let's take a long-distance runner. He had a good finish, way above his expected result, and was asked to undergo a doping test. Which he refused citing "the law of his country" or any other reason. Well, it may supersede in ordinary life. But definitely not in the sport they are engaged in where the rules approved by the international federation govern. So he is declared a non-passer, a doping-user, and rightly so.
What happens next? Somebody writes an article describing his unusually fast finishing spurts or such. It is not so much of an evidence, just sort of explanation for the public and some things you should pay attention to in the future when suspecting someone of the same. That's what we have here.
promoKC promoKC 4/29/2016 11:08
gambit-man, you are totally wrong.
From FIDE rules:
"The arbiter may require the player to allow his clothes, bags or other items to be inspected, in private. The arbiter or a person authorised by the arbiter shall inspect the player and shall be of the same gender as the player. If a player refuses to cooperate with these obligations, the arbiter shall take measures in accordance with Article 12.9."
"The ACC recommends the following sanctions: 1st offense – up to 3-year suspension from all FIDE rated events..."
http://www.fide.com/FIDE/handbook/Anti%20Cheating%20Guidelines.pdf
If a person on a train refuses to show his ticket, he is considered a fare dodger. Nobody cares if he actually has a ticket or not. It's that simple.
I keep saying that the article contains just additional proof, convincing or not. Chessbase would have never allowed such an article to be published in case that only indirect evidence was present.
promoKC promoKC 4/29/2016 07:58
gambit-man, what do you mean by "I too would refuse"? How can you? If the police stops you in connection with a nearby accident and asks for your ID or passport, you can't just "refuse". Such are the rules. Otherwise everyone thinks you have a good reason for this.
promoKC promoKC 4/29/2016 07:55
firestorm, yes I have. You mentioned Lilov no less than 24 times, and never ever touched upon the shoe issue which characterises Danov as a cheater without much doubt. You are also trying to support Ivanov, but your efforts are in vain - he has been officially punished. The same refers to Tetimov. So my previous question is still valid: can you (or gambit-man, if you are two different persons) write a single post on Danov without mentioning Lilov? I think it's a rhetorical question - obviously you can't :).
promoKC promoKC 4/29/2016 07:21
gambit-man and firestorm, you are definitely Lilov-biased. You can't write about anything but Lilov. Although in this post we are discussing Danov, and only him.
Well, make a publication on Lilov, and we'll discuss him there. Right now your attempts to steer the conversation away from Danov look like a desperate counter-attack.
Please be so kind and in the next post, without ever mentioning Lilov or the rest, try to comment on Danov's behaviour, namely:
1. The shoe issue (his refusal to undergo the required checks).
2. The refusal to complain on the above checks and dismissal from the competition.
3. If the selection of his games, not a perfect one as it is, contributes anything to the accusations.
4. Some comments above about his frequent use of the toilet.
If you ask me, the shoe issue itself is more than enough. All the rest is optional and comes as additional evidence.
promoKC promoKC 4/29/2016 02:46
Jason Rihel, I don't quite see your point. Re8 itself is not a sufficient evidence, no argue about that. It was just mentioned in relation to another game by Danov's compatriot, Ivan Tetimov, a proven cheater, who made exactly the same slip in one of his "winning" games.
gambit-man is trying to draw our attention to various things - Mr. Lilov, Mr. Kuznetsov, Chessbase policy etc. But he glosses over the main subject, i.e. Danov himself. Currently there are more pros than contras for him being a cheater, the recent case with the shoes and the arbiter's decision to dismiss him being the main argument.
What are the contras? He is from Varna and not Blagoevgrad as all this bunch of cheaters (Ivanov, Tetimov etc.). He has a high blitz-rating (although we had Feller, Nigalidze or most recently Aslanov who are by no means weak players, but cheated anyway). And that's all.
My view is that there are definitely more pros. I keep saying that the blog post's idea was not to learn how to catch the cheaters solely by analysing their games, but rather to use this tool as an additional evidence. Although Lilov could have been more convincing in this, that's for sure.
Jason Rihel Jason Rihel 4/29/2016 12:34
@promoKC, The shoes are evidence, a very high correlation to a top engine is evidence, but the crazy things I've seen missed by 2200-2300 players, in time trouble or not, like Re8, is no evidence of anything. I've seen players try to "punish" their opponents for playing out losing positions, only to blunder a draw or worse. I've seen players think they have the win in hand, make a few lazy moves and lose. I've seen people blow mates in 1 right after making time control. I've seen players play like geniuses for 45 moves and then get frightened by a ghost like the mating line I mentioned, even when the simple moves like Kf3 are "obvious". But you're right, they were all probably using engines and wanted to throw us off their trail by being dunderheads.
promoKC promoKC 4/28/2016 03:24
Jason Rihel, it's not. Well, maybe not in a second, but in 15 seconds. The king goes to f3.
These are, however, just additional examples. The main thing is that he refused to take off the shoes and was subsequently expelled from the tournament. This definitely makes him a cheater.
Lilov's article was mainly aimed at how to detect probable cheaters through their suspicious play.
Jason Rihel Jason Rihel 4/28/2016 01:55
Just one example of how the evidence is being overstated. In the analysis board, they claim that Re8 would be found by any club player. Well, as a club player, the first line I checked in my head went: 1.Re8 Rb2+ 2. Kg3 f4+ 3. Kh3 Bf1 4. Bg2 Bxg2 mate. Whoops. If I were in a blitz situation, for example, I might have seen that line first and realized that gxf5 keeps my king absolutely safe, and played it. And maybe not even in a blitz situation, if I was feeling tired, a little lazy, or maybe just petulant, I might have played gxf5 after being shocked by the mating line and not wanting to badly misplay a winning game.
MagicLieske MagicLieske 4/28/2016 01:05
Interesting, looks like in the game Danov, Radi–Ustianovich, Naza two cheaters rendezvous-ed: one with engine support, the other sandbagging/dumping his rating, in order to grab rating prizes for below 2300
http://echecs64.20minutes-blogs.fr/tag/ustianovich
https://www.facebook.com/groups/141553385913043/1000313293370377/?notif_t=group_activity&notif_id=1461794776807105#
Pionki Pionki 4/28/2016 05:58
Chessbase is promoting witch hunting.
HarryHaller HarryHaller 4/28/2016 02:46
Stopping chess cheating is very easy. Unfortunately many chess officials do not give a damn, respect chess enough, or realize the extreme damage even limited cases of cheating (and their unknown prevalence) are doing to the game.

First, FIDE MUST make having any electronic device in the playing hall illegal. No "you can have it but not carry it in the bathroom", or "you can have it but not use it". No, they must all be simply not allowed. This has to be done. And if a few amateurs leave chess because they are worried to be without their phone for a few hours, their numbers are far less than those who are leaving chess because of the atmosphere of paranoia and sense that the game is lost.

Such a rule will allow organizers to easily check any player who is suspicious for electronics, either before, after, or during the game. There will be no need to intercept them going to the bathroom. There will be no need to disturb them during the game. Before or after, unannounced, they can be checked. There are metal detectors and thermal imaging devices which can find any electronics. There is no need for any computer analysis of games, looking for coincidence of moves with a computer's. There is no need for speculation about "suspicious results". The public will never fully believe such "proof". There will always be moral ambiguity, and a hesitance to punish or publicize the player's name. And there will be continuous suspicion, on everybody. Nor would such methods of detection work all the time. A reasonably strong player could cheat only on a couple of key moments, and would not be caught.

Second, penalties for cheating must be HARSH. Once a player is caught with electronic devices, it should be fairly clear whether they were using them or just forgot them (which should be a very rare situation). The onus would be on them to prove the latter. If the electronics include some secret communication devices, then all should be clear. A player, of any age, caught cheating with computers in chess has committed a horrible offence against the game, and has lost the right to play again in official tournaments. The penalty should be a lifetime ban. This is the only way to save chess. This person is not going to prison - they are just banned from ever playing chess again - something which they have given up their right to by pissing all over the game.

Stopping cheating is easy to do, but will take some dedicated action from officials. If you are concerned about this, contact your local chess politician.
RJ Nolts RJ Nolts 4/28/2016 02:13
you have no evidence!!! just suspicious....
yesenadam yesenadam 4/27/2016 11:52
"There are too many opinions here and too much to read. Please CB makes a selection.
So much talk that is not needed. " And - lol - you go on to give your unneeded opinion.
Thank you Mr TambourineMan for saving me the trouble of reading yours any further. I'm not sure which is more remarkable, your laziness or effrontery. Please save yourself the excessive bother of reading or commenting here again, thank you.
jjmolina jjmolina 4/27/2016 11:26
"Meanwhile, at every tournament I've been to, players are allowed to chat with their friends during the game, and cheating without a computer in your shoe would be that easy. And even getting arbiters (TDs in my country) to get players to stop talking loudly _about_their_ongoing_games_ is an apparently impossible thing to ask. Even when they're talking about their games with higher-rated players, who like to give folksy-sounding advice without recommending actual moves, and where they are often implying which plan to use. IMO clear cheating, but good luck stopping it."
I've also been in that situation, at the very least, it gets on your nerves. It may look like the problem with computer assistance, is that it can be generalised. If it's a strong human player lending a hand, they look the other way, because they come in short supply and therefore, could never reach epidemic proportions.
Aighearach Aighearach 4/27/2016 09:16
I also "go very often to the toilet," and I'm sure that the human mind, being what it is, naturally notices that. Of course, anybody actually observing my activities that closely should also notice that I pace a lot, and nervously sip lots of beverages during my game. I'd rather go to the restroom "too many times" than hold it in and distract myself to try to look "normal."

Tournaments where I win a class prize, my performance rating was 400 or more points higher than some other tournaments where I did not win any prize. Nobody would notice a player losing and going to the restroom a lot, unless they leave some sort of scandalous scent. But if you win and go frequently, people might even remove the ceiling panels and get paranoid about the facility having wiring in the crawl spaces.

Meanwhile, at every tournament I've been to, players are allowed to chat with their friends during the game, and cheating without a computer in your shoe would be that easy. And even getting arbiters (TDs in my country) to get players to stop talking loudly _about_their_ongoing_games_ is an apparently impossible thing to ask. Even when they're talking about their games with higher-rated players, who like to give folksy-sounding advice without recommending actual moves, and where they are often implying which plan to use. IMO clear cheating, but good luck stopping it.
basler88 basler88 4/27/2016 07:55
Great article! However, my questions are; how does he do it and why doesn’t the tournament organizers doing nothing to stop him? Everyone know is name and if his name shows up on a tournament registration shouldn’t that push a red button? So search him before and after every game. Why can’t the Chess community do the same as the Bicycle race community does today with recently motor driven bikes, the check it out before and after every race and between the big tours. Don’t let this typ of cheaters play on, just do something and if you catch them, give them a life time ban from any tournament. Don’t wait do it right now as this guy does it for years and years and it looks to me he gets away and get his money too. Hello FIDE got it??
MortalWombat MortalWombat 4/27/2016 06:42
Cheetah
CID64 CID64 4/27/2016 06:25
I play with Radov Dani in Plovdiv 2015.Now,I understand why he go very often to the toilet.
Radena Radena 4/27/2016 05:46
I think, It is a crime killing somebody character deliberately without proved it in a court. The truth is Mr Lilov has no real evidence, basically only on prejudice matter. It is about a justice.
Bill Alg Bill Alg 4/27/2016 05:07
Wow, is X a cheater? tell us what you think. What complete garbage of an article.
Radena Radena 4/27/2016 04:06
If you find a best move in a game so that you can win in a tournament, you must be careful! Ask Lilov or Chessbase first! Lol!
jimliew jimliew 4/27/2016 03:17
Lilov is attempting to make a career out of this.
littleboots littleboots 4/27/2016 03:08
By this standard Magnus Carlsen is a "cheater" as his moves often coincide with the computers best evaluation.
littleboots littleboots 4/27/2016 03:06
Paranoid witch-hunt, it's happened many, many unfortunate times in human history where people point the finger with little or no evidence for political gain. Innocent until PROVEN guilty.
Semyorka Semyorka 4/27/2016 02:49
Why not analyze the blitz games of the suspected cheater, mister Lilov? His blitz rating has also a steep rise over the years. I assume cheating in blitz is almost impossible without a 'Maxwell Smart' brain implant delivered by some kind of governmental secret service.
thlai80 thlai80 4/27/2016 02:37
@Mt TambourineMan, I like your 'if'. Which means you don't have what you had said apart from trying to dirty flirt and stamp your male ego and confidence seeing the pics shown by Cariba. And you have just indirectly answered that you won't allow stripping your boxer. Imagine another Mr TambourineMan-like mentality dude force strip your pants and shaming you publicly in the process.
Carmeille Carmeille 4/27/2016 02:36
not fully convincing. I wonder how chessbase could publish this. There are no proof. I have also played brilliant games and awful games in a row. That's why I have 2300 elo and not 2400 or 2500.
Mr TambourineMan Mr TambourineMan 4/27/2016 02:24
@Cariba . There is a little difference between taking off someons shoes and undress someone naked so that comparison , I think is lame .

But ok if I would have 2333 in ELO and 11 inches , and someone suspect that I am messing around with chess moves in my pants I would laugh and ask for a strip searchad by a beautiful blond short haired female arbiter . Unfortunately , she will not find what theyll are looking for.
abdekker abdekker 4/27/2016 01:24
I hate these accusations of cheating. Just make sure players in contention for a substantial prize are definitely clean and forget about the rest. These stories are ugly witch-hunts which demean our great game.