Keeping Score

[Sevan_Muradian]

@mregan

Sevan,
Let’s think about the situation that we could be in if eNotate is running on Android and iOS devices. I’ve got a room full of players with IPADs, Ipod Touches, and Android tablets of various form factors. Now every one of these devices can run chess playing programs. How am I supposed to monitor them? What happens if they don’t like leaving them at the board? Since they need to carry them with them after the game, I’ve got spectators holding them while looking at games.
Since all these can connect with either 3G or WiFi, how are they any different than a phone? Sending a receiving texts is a lot easier than talking on a phone and, in fact, that’s the method the French players used to cheat at the World Team Championship.
Because we don’t want any communication to anyone outside the playing hall, I would have to outlaw all devices with WiFi or data connections. That is all of these devices. So, the bottom line is that this cannot possibly be allowed to be used in any tournament.
While I know there are clearly advantages to recording directly in an machine readable format, the disadvantages of allowing all these devices are huge.
Mike

Mike - I understand your concern. I’m not discounting it. It’s one reason why currently when eNotate executes, it disables any communications like Wi-Fi. In order to re-enable it, you have to leave the program completely, which means saving the current game, and manually enable Wi-Fi or other communications. This would be quite noticeable.

Now is there the concern that people will walk away with their device from the table? There is. However the organizer or director still has to power to do two things - (1) disallow the use of the device completely, or (2) require that it stays at the table at all times. Don’t want to comply with option #2, refer to option #1.

[wbport]

@Sevan Muradian

… (W)hen eNotate executes, it disables any communications like Wi-Fi. In order to re-enable it, you have to leave the program completely, which means saving the current game, and manually enable Wi-Fi or other communications. This would be quite noticeable.

That may be true now, but what would be stopping a programmer/hacker from creating an app which looks like eNotate that doesn’t disable other communications or can even send the current position to a chess engine?

[Sevan_Muradian]

@wbport

@Sevan Muradian

… (W)hen eNotate executes, it disables any communications like Wi-Fi. In order to re-enable it, you have to leave the program completely, which means saving the current game, and manually enable Wi-Fi or other communications. This would be quite noticeable.

That may be true now, but what would be stopping a programmer/hacker from creating an app which looks like eNotate that doesn’t disable other communications or can even send the current position to a chess engine?

The same thing that stops someone from gutting a MonRoi to do what the programmer wants it to do… which is nothing… It might actually be preferred because everyone is lulled into the security of an independent hardware platform and thus won’t think twice to question.

Again an organizer can choose not to allow an electronic scoresheet to be used. That’s up the individual event organizer.

[relyea]

Wasn’t there a case a couple of years ago where a (young) player was accused by his opponent of studying the position on his Monroi rather than the board? Didn’t the opponent object and the TD rule that the player couldn’t look at his Monroi? Didn’t the player’s father appeal to the USCF and have the TD’s decision reversed? Is this all my imagination? I thought this was discussed on the forums at the time, and I can even remember the player’s name.

Alex Relyea

[Michael_A_Murray]

@Ron Suarez

@MikeMurray

Let’s say that x seconds after you enter the opponents’ move, a few pixels change down in the corner if and only if it detects a certain condition. When you enter your move, the pixels change back. You don’t have to stare endlessly at the screen. With practice, your eye just sweeps over it and it’s unlikely your opponent would notice. The amount of information that could be conveyed this way is limited only by one’s ingenuity…

Unfortunately Mike, this idea of yours doesn’t hold water in real life applicability. If the x of x seconds is more than 1 or 2 then it would be apparent and obvious the player was doing something other than keep score with the device. A thinking time of 1 or 2 seconds for a program is not much for a decent playing ability.

Ron, you exhibit the true naivete of an honest man.

There’s no reason for “x” to be 1 or 2 seconds. Let’s say x=60 seconds or more. The program, after the “mark” has moved, cranks away, changing a couple of pixels in an unobtrusive place on the screen if it finds you have a move that gains you, say, 200 centipawns. You don’t have to glance at the screen until a minute has passed. You don’t have to glance at the screen every move. If you’re still in the opening or way ahead in material or confident of your position, you don’t have to look at all. But if the position is complicated and you want to know whether it’s worth spending time and energy looking for a forced win, the program will tell you. Not as good as using Fritz in a correspondence game, but a help none the less, a nice edge.

I’m sure such a program could provide an “edge” in many other ways.

@Ron Suarez

I own one of these and have used it. I also have played against opponents and watched players that own either of these devices. There is no good reason to look at the screen for more than a second after you have made the move on the screen.

Sure, someone could get all techno-geek and change the insides of one of these things AND change the program to analyze. However, that is a very, very difficult and expensive thing to do. And if someone has the technical ability and where-with-all to do such a thing, why is he playing Chess for money? He’d make a lot more doing something else with that technical ability and performance.

Why have all these online cheats been developed, for anonymous blitz games with no money at stake? People contribute to open source software simply for the satisfaction. For that matter, why all the computer viruses that simply wreck things or display smart-aleck messages? Ego trips, or some other internal satisfaction. A slick scam can be creative, almost a work of art.

Now, with thousands of dollars in class prizes involved for, say, a little group of college technoids over a few months time, you have a lot extra at stake, in addition to the satisfaction of beating “the man”.

You’re kidding yourself if you think you could spot the cheat eyeballing the device. Players continually glance over the room, look at their watch, look out the window, at the adjacent board, stare into space, glance at their scoresheet. And it’s fairly easy to keep one’s head down so the opponent can’t tell where you’re looking. You seem to be considering only the case of somebody staring fixedly at the screen for long periods of time. That ain’t necessary.

[Ron_Suarez]

Moderator Mode: Off

Alright Mike, I’m naive.

You are making your claim of a problem with these devices on the possibility that someone could do these things. How much of a problem is it in real life? The Chicago Open just occurred with big money prizes and the World Open is about to happen. What are the odds that someone would cheat with one of these devices in either of these tournaments? And if they did cheat, what are the odds that they would not be caught? As the games and tournament progresses the play would tell as it did a few years ago with the guy that wore the hat and stuff.

Also, if there are some people that want to cheat, I am sure they will cheat with devices that are completely different than one of these electronic scorekeeping devices. We have ear canal gadgets that cannot be seen from casual observance. Today’s technology level is so high that the cheater could find numerous ways to cheat.

As Sevan has pointed out, there is nothing stopping someone from gutting a Monroi device and putting their own electronics and software in it. So even these proprietary devices aren’t excluded from tampering.

I certainly enjoy the electronic scorekeeping technology. As I said in my first post of this thread, it is easy and highly convenient to use in managing the game score after the game. It also has the advantage of producing a completely legible game score. I should be able to use this in any tournament I play. I can easily prove the device has not been tampered with as well as the software. Once the game has started, the only way to change the program would be to end the game. This would be extremely obvious if someone tried to do that.

I also plan on using my little Mp3 player and Klipsch earbuds while playing. Yes, people can be hiding some type of communication device, but give me a break. I am not and will not do that so leave me alone.

If you and I were to meet in a tournament, Mike, would you not allow me to use my electronics?

As far as the TD point of view, I am a TD as well and can tell you what I do to insure there is no cheating. First off if someone were to use a Monroi or eNotate device as for scorekeeping, I might inspect it to see that it ran as the it should normally run. If someone decided to modify the program of either, there would be differences. If I didn’t know the player then an inspection might be called for. I know Darren Erickson has an eNotate and I know a lot of school kids have the Monroi. Then I would observe the player during the tournament as how he is using it. Notice I said observe not constantly watch. If the player is using the device truly as a score keeping device, then his behavior and usage of it would have a definite pattern to that. To look at the device after 60 seconds, for instance, would be abnormal.

Also the player’s performance could be indicative of him cheating or not. If someone is doing exceptionally well in a tournament, like the Chicago Open, and he is using an eNotate and had an Mp3 player and Klipsch earbuds, for instance, it would be normal and natural to check the devices I…I mean he is using. In this particular case the TD would see that it is the unadulterated eNotate program running as designed, and that the player only looked at it the exact same way he would a scoresheet. The TD would also hear David Lanz piano music coming from the little Mp3 player. So they would just have to pay me the big bucks.

[Michael_A_Murray]

@Ron Suarez

I also plan on using my little Mp3 player and Klipsch earbuds while playing. Yes, people can be hiding some type of communication device, but give me a break. I am not and will not do that so leave me alone.

If you and I were to meet in a tournament, Mike, would you not allow me to use my electronics?

I would have no objection to your using these various electronic devices.

[Crume]

Tournament chess is far and away a local game based on the survey results that Sevan released in another forum.

Someone I know is using an electronic device in my tournament? Sure no problem. In fact, I would probably open myself to a “claim” and let someone use a non-approved device in a small tournament if I know the player well (character, established in chess community, etc.).

Someone I don’t know will have additional scrutiny if using eNotate, but I’d still allow it.

[tanstaafl]

@Sevan Muradian

@wbport

@Sevan Muradian

… (W)hen eNotate executes, it disables any communications like Wi-Fi. In order to re-enable it, you have to leave the program completely, which means saving the current game, and manually enable Wi-Fi or other communications. This would be quite noticeable.

That may be true now, but what would be stopping a programmer/hacker from creating an app which looks like eNotate that doesn’t disable other communications or can even send the current position to a chess engine?

The same thing that stops someone from gutting a MonRoi to do what the programmer wants it to do… which is nothing… It might actually be preferred because everyone is lulled into the security of an independent hardware platform and thus won’t think twice to question.

Again an organizer can choose not to allow an electronic scoresheet to be used. That’s up the individual event organizer.

Supposedly, THEIR hardware is secured. They’ve claimed that it is, at least. They’ve claimed that you can’t load somebody else’s software on a MonRoi. The devices eNotate is using, however, CAN be programmed by anybody. (well… any PROGRAMMER, at least). It would be EASY for me to write a program for an Axim, iPad, iPod-touch, etc. (in fact, I have written programs for a couple of handheld devices).

[billbrock]

@Ron Suarez

You are making your claim of a problem with these devices on the possibility that someone could do these things. How much of a problem is it in real life? The Chicago Open just occurred with big money prizes and the World Open is about to happen. What are the odds that someone would cheat with one of these devices in either of these tournaments? And if they did cheat, what are the odds that they would not be caught? As the games and tournament progresses the play would tell as it did a few years ago with the guy that wore the hat and stuff.

[…]

To date, only the incompetents and the ironic (“John von Neumann”? heh) have been caught. It is so easy to cheat that I’d be shocked if a handful of players aren’t already doing it at each of these events. A NTD recently gave a small group of us an informal account of probable cheating at a 2011 title event in which no prize monies were involved.

When cheating is suspected, and when the accused has a handheld device that allows multitasking, I think it’s reasonable for the TD to ask that each of the chess applications & each active app be displayed. As in the German championship case, the TD may find a position that occurred in the current game.

I’d also be shocked if more than a handful of players are cheating. The overwhelming majority of us play for pleasure. There are easier ways to make money; there are easier ways to steal money.