Your network blocks the Lichess assets!

lichess.org
Donate

Cheating: Trust and Traitors in Chess

Just a minor correction, concerning one sentence from #80. The following one: "In fact, I have never claimed that you had accused me of cheating."
Now I see that my initial reaction in #4 contained a sentence saying (among other things) that GM Kramnik SORT OF accused me of cheating. That said, it is probably the only time when I stated something similar, and given my initial shock, it is not too surprising.
The complaint to FIDE contains the following sentence almost at the beginning:
"Actually I am not sure whether he is accusing me, given that ratings of several other players are marked red (and presumably considered especially suspect), while mine is blue."

In fact, I believe that GM Kramnik either accused me, or did not. (Not really controversial, it sounds very much like a tautology.) Even if there were not accusations but argumented concerns (which might be his position, if I understand it properly), he either finds my play doubtful, or not.
If he does not, it is plainly wrong to mention me publicly in such a way in connection with cheating.
If he does, he should come up with some valid arguments, preferably not publicly. (I have not seen any, the metric does not seem to work well for reasons mentioned earlier, including #80.) And if his arguments are not enough to convince the experts that I am at least suspect, he should be punished for his public claims which suggest that. And the same goes for other players whom he mentions, it is not just about me. I do not want to quote the whole text of my complaint, but it contained the following statement concerning GM Kramnik: "Finally, he should publicly apologize for his least founded accusations (...)"
This is very much in line with my comment #80. I just wanted to correct that one inaccurate sentence.

Just a minor correction, concerning one sentence from #80. The following one: "In fact, I have never claimed that you had accused me of cheating." Now I see that my initial reaction in #4 contained a sentence saying (among other things) that GM Kramnik SORT OF accused me of cheating. That said, it is probably the only time when I stated something similar, and given my initial shock, it is not too surprising. The complaint to FIDE contains the following sentence almost at the beginning: "Actually I am not sure whether he is accusing me, given that ratings of several other players are marked red (and presumably considered especially suspect), while mine is blue." In fact, I believe that GM Kramnik either accused me, or did not. (Not really controversial, it sounds very much like a tautology.) Even if there were not accusations but argumented concerns (which might be his position, if I understand it properly), he either finds my play doubtful, or not. If he does not, it is plainly wrong to mention me publicly in such a way in connection with cheating. If he does, he should come up with some valid arguments, preferably not publicly. (I have not seen any, the metric does not seem to work well for reasons mentioned earlier, including #80.) And if his arguments are not enough to convince the experts that I am at least suspect, he should be punished for his public claims which suggest that. And the same goes for other players whom he mentions, it is not just about me. I do not want to quote the whole text of my complaint, but it contained the following statement concerning GM Kramnik: "Finally, he should publicly apologize for his least founded accusations (...)" This is very much in line with my comment #80. I just wanted to correct that one inaccurate sentence.

I Support GM David Navara in the subject. I think GM Kramnik owes to GM Navara an apology,

I Support GM David Navara in the subject. I think GM Kramnik owes to GM Navara an apology,

Thanks for sharing this with me

Thanks for sharing this with me

Given that GM Kramnik has an argument with FIDE and opened some topics again, I feel compelled to react.
GM Kramnik presents the topic in his tweets as if he contacted me directly and I did not want to talk to him. I was indeed not overly eager to contact a person who had made many problematic statements regarding cheating, then violated the fair-play rules in Titled Tuesday and eventually blamed for his ban the player who discovered the fair-play violation (IM Matvey Galchenko analyzed the games of "Krakozia" in his video) instead of accepting responsibility. That said, I would have reacted if GM Kramnik contacted me directly. But he did not. There was just an anonymous account reacting to my forum post. I found that comment only by chance and was not sure whether it was GM Kramnik and his account.

There is a comment #75 earlier in this discussion, made by an anonymous untitled unverified account https://lichess.org/@/CHECKING1979. The comment sounds like GM Kramnik (although ChatGPT could immitate him nowadays) and the author of the comment claims to be GM Kramnik. Many people claim something like this online, and mostly it is false. Claiming it is a discussion is "cheap", as a punishment for a fake claim is very unlikely to follow. If you want to show your identity, write it on your profile. Believe me or not, but I even saw a strong titled player (perhaps even a GM) here on Lichess impersonating GM Kramnik. (That player removed GM Kramnik's name after I reported him, perhaps the Lichess staff had intervened.)
I found the comment of CHECKING1979 by pure chance about a month and a half after it was written. My previous comment had been #57 and I just stopped following that discussion then, as I was leaving for a tournament and did not want to distract myself.

I replied in #80 (and #81) in this thread, expressing my doubts about the identity of CHECKING1979 in the very first sentence. I was not sure whether it was GM Kramnik writing from his account, GM Kramnik writing from another player's account (why would I react then?) or someone else immitating GM Kramnik. I was inclined to believe that it was GM Kramnik's comment and perhaps even his account, but I am not a person who would normally happily download files from an unverified source.

And what happened? CHECKING1979 did not react to #80 in the forum. They did not add their name on the profile. GM Kramnik did not inform me that CHECKING1979 was indeed him, although we were staying in the same hotel during the Batumi olympiad. He did not send me that message through friends, either. (Believe it or not, we still have some common friends and many common contacts.) Towards the end of June 2025 GM Kramnik mentioned this correspondence (#75 and #80) in a tweet. I learned that with certainty only when I read his tweets on July 10. (They caused me strong distress, but I had to read them to prepare for an eventual trial. I have not received any message from the court until now, by the way.) Grandmaster Kramnik never confirmed to me that CHECKING1979 was him, although I had clearly expressed my doubts. By the way, he has a verified titled account which can be recognized as his by Google, which makes it even more mysterious why he was trying to contact me in this peculiar way.
Sorry for opening this topic again, but I think that people should know this. (After all, I have right to defend against that tweet publicly.)

Given that GM Kramnik has an argument with FIDE and opened some topics again, I feel compelled to react. GM Kramnik presents the topic in his tweets as if he contacted me directly and I did not want to talk to him. I was indeed not overly eager to contact a person who had made many problematic statements regarding cheating, then violated the fair-play rules in Titled Tuesday and eventually blamed for his ban the player who discovered the fair-play violation (IM Matvey Galchenko analyzed the games of "Krakozia" in his video) instead of accepting responsibility. That said, I would have reacted if GM Kramnik contacted me directly. But he did not. There was just an anonymous account reacting to my forum post. I found that comment only by chance and was not sure whether it was GM Kramnik and his account. There is a comment #75 earlier in this discussion, made by an anonymous untitled unverified account https://lichess.org/@/CHECKING1979. The comment sounds like GM Kramnik (although ChatGPT could immitate him nowadays) and the author of the comment claims to be GM Kramnik. Many people claim something like this online, and mostly it is false. Claiming it is a discussion is "cheap", as a punishment for a fake claim is very unlikely to follow. If you want to show your identity, write it on your profile. Believe me or not, but I even saw a strong titled player (perhaps even a GM) here on Lichess impersonating GM Kramnik. (That player removed GM Kramnik's name after I reported him, perhaps the Lichess staff had intervened.) I found the comment of CHECKING1979 by pure chance about a month and a half after it was written. My previous comment had been #57 and I just stopped following that discussion then, as I was leaving for a tournament and did not want to distract myself. I replied in #80 (and #81) in this thread, expressing my doubts about the identity of CHECKING1979 in the very first sentence. I was not sure whether it was GM Kramnik writing from his account, GM Kramnik writing from another player's account (why would I react then?) or someone else immitating GM Kramnik. I was inclined to believe that it was GM Kramnik's comment and perhaps even his account, but I am not a person who would normally happily download files from an unverified source. And what happened? CHECKING1979 did not react to #80 in the forum. They did not add their name on the profile. GM Kramnik did not inform me that CHECKING1979 was indeed him, although we were staying in the same hotel during the Batumi olympiad. He did not send me that message through friends, either. (Believe it or not, we still have some common friends and many common contacts.) Towards the end of June 2025 GM Kramnik mentioned this correspondence (#75 and #80) in a tweet. I learned that with certainty only when I read his tweets on July 10. (They caused me strong distress, but I had to read them to prepare for an eventual trial. I have not received any message from the court until now, by the way.) Grandmaster Kramnik never confirmed to me that CHECKING1979 was him, although I had clearly expressed my doubts. By the way, he has a verified titled account which can be recognized as his by Google, which makes it even more mysterious why he was trying to contact me in this peculiar way. Sorry for opening this topic again, but I think that people should know this. (After all, I have right to defend against that tweet publicly.)

Thank you for sharing this. I do not want to speak about Kramnik. I find his behavior unacceptable and it needs to stop. Being on the receiving end must be unsettling, to say the least. Let me, instead of telling you what I think of Kramnik's behavior, focus on how I perceive you:

You and I played exactly once, in a Chess960 arena which you regularly join. I enjoyed the game and the chance to play against one of the strongest players around, being a lowly 2000 myself. Naturally, I quickly lost after mishandling the opening. Either way, I very much appreciate your regular appearance in those tournaments, and I believe I am not alone in my belief that your participation there greatly enriches lichess, the arenas, and all players there. You gave advice in chat, even, being kind and open to all humans there, regardless of rating, simply based on a shared love for the game.

Chess needs more players like you. I hope that you can remain cheerful and kind, whatever baseless allegations people throw at you.

Thank you for sharing this. I do not want to speak about Kramnik. I find his behavior unacceptable and it needs to stop. Being on the receiving end must be unsettling, to say the least. Let me, instead of telling you what I think of Kramnik's behavior, focus on how I perceive you: You and I played exactly once, in a Chess960 arena which you regularly join. I enjoyed the game and the chance to play against one of the strongest players around, being a lowly 2000 myself. Naturally, I quickly lost after mishandling the opening. Either way, I very much appreciate your regular appearance in those tournaments, and I believe I am not alone in my belief that your participation there greatly enriches lichess, the arenas, and all players there. You gave advice in chat, even, being kind and open to all humans there, regardless of rating, simply based on a shared love for the game. Chess needs more players like you. I hope that you can remain cheerful and kind, whatever baseless allegations people throw at you.

Hi @RealDavidNavara wishing you all the best. My partner had the pleasure to meet you at a few tournaments, we are both big fans of yours. It is very hard to suggest what is best for you to do. It seems that nothing will stop K's idiotic nonsense :(( But please try to stay strong, best wishes

Hi @RealDavidNavara wishing you all the best. My partner had the pleasure to meet you at a few tournaments, we are both big fans of yours. It is very hard to suggest what is best for you to do. It seems that nothing will stop K's idiotic nonsense :(( But please try to stay strong, best wishes

@DailyInsanity Thanks for this interesting post, and putting a light on this virus. The virus keeps spreading on all levels, mine too. But I do think that we can discuss the virus without the need to mention the names of some people. All attention, negative or positive, will only give them fuel to continue their Quixotic crusade. Let's stop mentioning their names.

@RealDavidNavara I have the deepest respect for your feelings, and all your posts last year, on this disturbing subject. But how about completely ignoring all posts from some people? You could block them from appearing in your feeds. Might do wonders to your sleep!

@DailyInsanity Thanks for this interesting post, and putting a light on this **virus**. The virus keeps spreading on all levels, mine too. But I do think that we can discuss the virus without the need to mention the names of **_some people_**. All attention, negative or positive, will only give _them_ fuel to continue _their_ Quixotic crusade. Let's stop mentioning _their_ names. @RealDavidNavara I have the deepest respect for your feelings, and all your posts last year, on this disturbing subject. But how about completely ignoring all posts from _some people_? You could block them from appearing in your feeds. Might do wonders to your sleep!

@realdavidnavara The one good aspect of this situation is that over 95% of the active chess community whether it be serious OTB players or people that are following via Youtube or whatever are all on your side such as Levy Rozman and Hikaru Nakamura (especially Hikaru) after recent major events who are the top 2 most subscribed to chess content youtube channels in the world. Also anyone looking at the topic with common sense can see that the statistics are gathered in a completely wrong manner. (GMHikaru recently commented on how he is claiming his statistics line up better than people who have PhDs in the subject which I find a completely ridiculous claim on his end.) Another point Nakamura made is that if he hadn't started this situation in the first place he wouldn't be where he is now with his reputation being completely ruined. Not a single person I have talked to is not on yours and many others' side in this situation. The most ridiculous part of the "statistics" he presents is that no one has been shown how he collects this data. The way I look at this recent post by him is that if the chess world is an apartment complex, he started a fire to the complex and when people called him out for starting a fire he's demanded insurance payment for the damages. I am completely on your side in this situation.

Edit: I do realize however that this does not diminish the emotional effects of this on you and others and I am just trying to point out some bright spots of the situation.

@realdavidnavara The one good aspect of this situation is that over 95% of the active chess community whether it be serious OTB players or people that are following via Youtube or whatever are all on your side such as Levy Rozman and Hikaru Nakamura (especially Hikaru) after recent major events who are the top 2 most subscribed to chess content youtube channels in the world. Also anyone looking at the topic with common sense can see that the statistics are gathered in a completely wrong manner. (GMHikaru recently commented on how he is claiming his statistics line up better than people who have PhDs in the subject which I find a completely ridiculous claim on his end.) Another point Nakamura made is that if he hadn't started this situation in the first place he wouldn't be where he is now with his reputation being completely ruined. Not a single person I have talked to is not on yours and many others' side in this situation. The most ridiculous part of the "statistics" he presents is that no one has been shown how he collects this data. The way I look at this recent post by him is that if the chess world is an apartment complex, he started a fire to the complex and when people called him out for starting a fire he's demanded insurance payment for the damages. I am completely on your side in this situation. Edit: I do realize however that this does not diminish the emotional effects of this on you and others and I am just trying to point out some bright spots of the situation.

Thank you for your support! I am actually doing much better than some months before, hopefully it lasts so. By the way, after the tragic death of Daniel Naroditsky someone offered me to pay a good lawyer if GM Kramnik sues me and the trial takes place, which means that I do not need financial support. (I am not poor at all, but a trial in the Switzerland was not exactly a pleasant prospect. Now when the financial aspect has been solved, there is one worry less. And what is more important, I am feeling well again.
By the way, I have not signed the petition which demands that GM Kramnik should be stripped of the World Champion title. He earned the title in a fair way, he has been one of the strongest players in the world for about 25 years. I greatly admire the chess players Robert James Fischer and Vladimir Borisovich Kramnik (as well as all the other great players), although I do not admire them as people, to put it mildly. Being a big fan of Fischer Random Chess, I am used to separating the two things.
I do not want to escalate the conflict by reopening this thread, I just felt the urge to explain the situation regarding the earlier discussion in this thread.
I will probably stop the discussion here, as I have a lot of chess related work and want to perform better than in the past year. Happy New Year 2026!

Thank you for your support! I am actually doing much better than some months before, hopefully it lasts so. By the way, after the tragic death of Daniel Naroditsky someone offered me to pay a good lawyer if GM Kramnik sues me and the trial takes place, which means that I do not need financial support. (I am not poor at all, but a trial in the Switzerland was not exactly a pleasant prospect. Now when the financial aspect has been solved, there is one worry less. And what is more important, I am feeling well again. By the way, I have not signed the petition which demands that GM Kramnik should be stripped of the World Champion title. He earned the title in a fair way, he has been one of the strongest players in the world for about 25 years. I greatly admire the chess players Robert James Fischer and Vladimir Borisovich Kramnik (as well as all the other great players), although I do not admire them as people, to put it mildly. Being a big fan of Fischer Random Chess, I am used to separating the two things. I do not want to escalate the conflict by reopening this thread, I just felt the urge to explain the situation regarding the earlier discussion in this thread. I will probably stop the discussion here, as I have a lot of chess related work and want to perform better than in the past year. Happy New Year 2026!