Cheating has been a vividly discussed problem in chess; as cheating is rather difficult to prove in distance-matches (and obviously occurs much more often than in correspondence chess), some of the most treacherous cases of manipulation beyond the 64 squaresin the board will be shown below:
van den Enden – Praszak, 1974
Wether or not white used aids to close this duel in this favorable position is unknown. What is for sure, is that this match will come to an end very soon..
1. Qxg5+ fxg5 2.Kh5#
1 – 0
Curacao, 1962. One of the most popular and at the same time most disputed cases took place at the candidates’ tournament in Curacao in 1962: The Soviet players Pertrosjan, Geller, and Keres did not challenge each other in their duels and played remises in short moves (which were probably arranged in advance). The reason for this deal was for all of them to pick tough battles against Robert Fischer, so that Tigran Petrosjan became opponent of Botvinnik instead of favorite player Fischer.
Kristiansen – Jacobsen, 1976. Winning isn’t always that easy. The following case is made up of a ‘Big Boom’ followed by a fair moment of silence.. 1.Bxf7+ Kxf7 2.Nxe5+ Kg7 [2.. Ke8 can’t come for a rescue, because of 3.Qe6+ Be7 4.Bxf6; 2..Nxe5 takes over after 3.Qxf6+ black is hopelessly lost]
3.Qe6! Rg8 4.Bxf6+ Nxf6 5.Qf7+ Kh6 6.Qxf6 Bg7 7.Qh4#
1 – 0
New York, 1880. Even further back in the past lies the following issue that is possibly one of the very first recorded scam in the history of chess! This case is not about gaining an advantage on the board over the opponent – No, this is about selling the duel to obtain the prize money which is morally more than inappropriate and at the same time extremely difficult to prove. At the 5th Championship of the United States of America, according to the player Preston Ware, his opponent James Grundy bribed him with $20 before the game started to end the game in a drawn. At this point in the tournament, other than Ware, Grundy still had chances to obtain the tournament victory (and therefore the prize money), didn’t stick with the agreement and won the duel by taking advantage of the inferior Ware.
Lukownikow – Losev, 1980. No matter how safe they seem, walls of protection can be illusive.
1. Qxg6+ fxg6 2. Bc4+ Kg7 3.Rd7+ [The black can’t even escape a checkmate after the following moves, on the contrary, he gets stuck: 3.Bxf8+ Kxf8 4. Rhf1+ Kg7 5. Rd7+] 3.. Be7 4. Bxe7 Rxe7 [The intermediate chess after Rb1+ must be considered by white at their sacrifice of the queen, as they might lose to his own combination]. But after 5. Kd2 Rxh1 6. Bf6+ Kf8 7. Bg7# all chances fort he black king are gone for good. 5. Rxe7+ Kf8 6. Rf7+ and a checkmate is inevitable. Good job!
1 – 0
Cheating is often a problem on the level of team sport, too. At the very last game days of the chess season, results are arranged down to minor leagues determining the promotion and demotion of the teams. Who is looking for legal ways to gain an advantage might be interested in reading the antiquary book “The Theory And Practice of Gamemanship” by Stepehn Potter, which primarily focuses on psychological effects..
Napoli Costa – Corso, 1980. Here is an example for the toughtful reader not to be led to the misinterpretation that in the following combination the one whose turn it is is winning: 1.. Nxf3 2. gxf3 Bc3 3. bxc3 bxc3 4. Kb1 Ra8 .. There is no way out, et voila!
1 – 0
written by Frank, translated by Birthe