07-01-2014, 06:32 PM
Matthew Turner Wrote:Phil Thomas wrote
"What the sub committee is really trying to do is to decide how to upgrade those rules to cope with more advanced technology than the humble telephone. Which includes the real possibility of powerful chess engines being used out of sight of the opponent."
but I wonder how much of an issue this actually is? Let me pose you a question. You play in a 5 round tournament and one of your games is against a player playing remotely. Do you think there is more chance that the remote player will cheat by using a powerful engine or that one of the other four will nip to the toilet and use the app on their smart phone?
Instinctively and intuitively the remote player would be more likely to cheat.
Why? because I wouldn't be in the same room and I wouldn't know if he nipped off to the toilet leaving his clock running at the critical points in the game. Plus as others have said on this thread I would not have any body language to read.
Before anyone accuses me of slandering unnamed people.
I used to play of lot of correspondence chess. The opponents, in general, suddenly became much stronger when powerful chess engines became affordable. I surmise from Andy Muir's post that he may have had similar experiences around the same time. Adequate supervision is essential.
Let me ask all the readers a direct question. How would you feel if Boris Ivanov entered your section but revealed at the last minute that he wasn't able to leave Bulgaria to attend?
Where this concept has merit - in summer time I could fancy going on a family holiday to Arran* and play one round a day in a major Scottish event. A daily commute into Brodick would beat a daily commute into central Glasgow.
* Other islands are available.