I went to a chess tournament in Kansas City and was cheated out of some of my prize money and I feel that other people should be aware of this because many of the chess players at the tournament weren't even aware of what was going on until I complained. I happened to know both the chess players involved. So even if I can't prove they cheated in the court of law I know they were both guilty. When I first showed up to the tournament they were sharing a pitcher of beer. I believe what happened is since John Doe was the strongest player by far, at the tournament that they prearranged the draw, if they played. Maybe in return for a ride to the tournament. Because he could afford to throw away a half point and still win the tournament. Since I was a B player at the time, I am an A player now, it ended up directly costing me some of my prize money since I had a split with Robert Johnson. I confronted Robert, who is a friend of mine, directly and asked him if they had prearranged that game. He looked at me and smiled, not saying anything. I am changing both their names so that I won't be sued for libel. After complaining to the T.D. who was running the tournament and getting no satisfaction. He should have kicked them both out of the tournament! I proceeded to complain to the USCF ethics department and got no satisfaction. Here is my first letter to them:


Date: Tue 25 Sep 2007 2:55:13 pm CDT
Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.7) Gecko/20070914 Firefox/2.0.0.7
Subject: USCF 318: Other

To Whom It May Concern,
I have a complaint about a blatant violation of rules 20L and 14B6 at the Westport Flea Market Open on the date of Sept 22. John Doe - Rating 2440, USCF ID xxxxxxxx was playing Robert Johnson - Rating 1792, USCF ID xxxxxxxx, in the third round of the tournament when the two players agreed to a draw after five moves. John Doe and Robert Johnson are well known friends and Robert Johnson gave John Doe a ride to the tournament because Doe does not have a drivers license. While normally it is difficult to prove collusion in a short draw, after complaining to the tournament director I directly confronted both players at the beginning of the fourth round. When confronted John Doe denied collusion and then stated that he had to go somewhere. Which is an admission of guilt to prearranging the outcome of the game since Doe needed Johnson to drive him where ever he needed to go. Taking a half point buy would not have been sufficient. Please conta
ct the tournament director Gene Bate (xxx) xxx-xxxx, Email: gbate@blitz-it.net if you have any further questions. You may also contact Sam Roe xxx-xxx-xxxx, Email: xxxxxxx@gmail.com, who was a witness to the events above and personally knows both players.
FreeMindStuck
xxxxxxxxxxxx@gmail.com
USCF ID xxxxxxxx

And here is the USCF's response:

Sept. 25, 2007
Dear Mr. FreeMindStuck,
I will forward your email to Judy Misner who handles these types of complaints. You should hear from Judy soon regarding what you need to do next.

Thank you-
Yours for Chess,
Joan DuBois
U.S. Chess Director of:
Communications, Affiliate Relations &
Correspondence Chess
PO Box 3967
Crossville, TN 38557
(931) 787-1234 #123 or #130
(931) 787-1200 (Fax)

So I replied:

Dear Ms. DuBois,

Thank you for your prompt response.

FreeMindStuck

So then Ms. Misner sends me this email:

September 26, 2007

Hi Mr. FreeMindStuck,

Walter Brown is our USCF Liaison to the Rules Committee. Walter is out of the office until next Tuesday and I will be sure that he see's your email.

In the meantime you do need to provide us with a signed copy of your complaint and a $25.00 good faith deposit.

You may send this to my attention and I will see that Walter receives it upon his return to the office.

US Chess
Attn: Judy Misner
P.O. Box 3967
Crossville, TN 38557

Sincerely,
Judy Misner
USCF Managing Director of Operations


Can you imagine? I have been victimized by cheaters and what does the USCF do. It tries to shake me down for another 25 dollars. So this is how I responded:

Hi Ms. Misner,

I would have no problem provided you with a signed copy of my complaint. What I do have a problem with is risking another 25 dollars on this debacle after I have already lost money due to cheating in this last tournament. To be frank, I am not a rich man and am currently unemployed and will probably drop this matter rather than risk losing another 25 dollars. Under the code of ethics of the United States Chess Federation it states, "The deposit shall be returned unless the Committee rules that the case is frivolous." Perhaps you could give me a precise definition, as it pertains complaints of ethics violations, of the word frivolous and I might be willing to continue this matter. As it is conspiracy to predetermine the outcome of a game would be a difficult charge to prove in the court of law and thus deemed frivolous even if the charges are true. Furthermore I feel the USCF's policy of demanding a good faith deposit from the victims of ethical violations does nothing more then silence most people willing to speak out. And that such policies must do nothing more then encourage rampant cheating at USCF sanctioned events. I can't help but wonder how much more crime there would be in our society if when calling 911 the operator asked for a credit card number for a good faith deposit against frivolous 911 calls?

Sincerely

FreeMindStuck

And this is how Judy responds:

Hi FreeMindStuck,

Thank you for your reply.

Here is what I recommend. Since this appears to be a rules violation problem and should go to the Rules Committee, to see if they accept juridisdiction, I suggest that we wait until Walter Brown returns to the office next Tuesday, October 2, 2007.

I will review this with him and let's see if he feels that that your complaint would be accepted by the Rules Committeee. To be honest with you even though I have been employed with US Chess for 37 years, I have only been the liaison to the Ethics Committee since March 2007. So I feel more comfortable if you don't mind, we wait for Walter's return to the office and see what he recommends to you regarding the $25.00 fee.

Please let me know.

Thanks,
Judy

Let the run around begin. lol and it continues:

Hi Judy,

Thank you for your prompt replies, your time, and recommendations.


Sincerely

FreeMindStuck

Applying a little sugar...:

Hi FreeMindStuck,

Your welcome.

So is it OK with you that I review this Walter Brown next Tuesday and see what he recommends?

Judy

Giving me the run around...:

Hi Judy,

Yes that would be fine with me. I will keep in touch.

FreeMindStuck

And so this is what she sends me next and is the last bit of correspondence I received on the issue:

October 1, 2007

Hi FreeMindStuck,

Walter returned from the tournament however, it was due to a death in his family. So he had to go out of town again and will return to the office on October 3 or 4th. As soon as I can I will have him review your request.

Thanks for your patience.

Judy

At this point I am certain that they are going to do nothing and am ready to drop the issue but I reply:

Hi Judy,

That will be satisfactory. Please convey my condolences to Walter. I will look forward to your correspondence.

Patient as ever,

FreeMindStuck

So that is it. It is my opinion that the USCF is about as effective at enforcing its rules as the Bush adminstration is at inspecting Chinese products coming into the US. So I have thought about short draws and I have decided that the only way to keep people from cheating using the short draw is to change the rules so that losses are worth zero points, draws one point and wins worth 3 points. I would be interested in other peoples solutions or opinions on this subject.

I don't see how a short draw is cheating.

In the Swiss Chess publication in the 1970's they said, (not me) that in a game
played in a Switzerland Tournament two players played a game 8 moves and agreed to a draw. Those two players the Swiss Chess magazine wrote, should be hit on the ass.
Bobby Fischer complained about the Candidates Tournament in 1962, were there were easy draws played by the Soviet players.
I recall a European chess game played in the 70's where a player resigned
after his first move.
Some have recommended that U.S. chess tournaments have a 35 move
limit before a draw is called. I would agree with that.

What about repetitions?

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Bc5 4 c3 Nf6 5 d4 exd4 6 cxd4 Bb4+ 7 Bd2 Bxd2+ 8 Nbxd2 d5 9 exd5 Nxd5 10 Bc4 0-0 11 Qb3 Na5 12 Qa4+ Nc6 13 Qb3 Na5...could repeat for 20 moves...

To quote Emmanuel Lasker, "A game played by men of equal strength, if played accurately, will end in a draw, and it is apt to be dull." With this in mind, why waste time playing the game?
Dragoljub Janosevic vs Efim Geller (1968)
Sergei Rublevsky vs Jon Ludvig Hammer (2007)

I’ve heard complaints like this since I started playing chess nearly 50 years ago. No matter what measures have been tried in the past to prevent short draws they’ve ultimately failed because as long as a draw is a legitimate result in chess you can’t stop players from playing one if that’s what they want.

It is not unusual for high rated players to accept short draws in the last round to insure their prize money. Normally player’s ratings are much closer and if they had both been rated 2440 it wouldn’t have raised an eyebrow. This case is unusual due to the rating of the players involved but if the 2440 was guaranteed first place with a draw his claim is plausible. The 1792 can plausibly claim that with his rating he’d be more than happy to accept a draw against somebody nearly 650 points above him.

Bottom line is there is a long precedent for players accepting short last round draws and you can’t prove collusion. Even if you could I doubt anything would be done because it could set a precedent the other way which would put top players in an uproar. They’ve long claimed that if they want a draw there’s nothing to stop them from drawing be it in 5 moves or 30 moves.

As for the $25 I can understand that because if they didn’t have such a procedure I can imagine the USCF being inundated with frivolous claims. I understand your frustration at being placed in an unfortunate situation as many other players before you have but that’s the way it’s always been and, fair or not, I wouldn’t look for things to change. I’d forget about it and spend the $25 on something else.

Prearranged draws will continue to exist in chess, little you can do about it but loathe the ones involved, if justified. Though I can understand how you can be very frustrated about this, I've always felt you should focus on your own results rather than worry about someone elses.

I do agree that people that cheat are loathsome. But I disagree with the sentiment. - "I've always felt you should focus on your own results rather than worry about someone elses." Chess tournaments are a competition and the results of your fellow competitors do matter. And I find the idea that the high rated players in a particular club, who are friends, can throw each other points to manipulate the money results and that I'm supposed to just mind my own business repugnant.

Here are the relevant rules:

14B6. Premature or Prearranged draws. It is unethical and unsporting to agree to a draw before a serious contest has begun. The same is true of all arrangements to prearrange game results. In case of clear violations of the moral principles of the game, penalties should be imposed at the director's discretion. See also 20L. Manipulating results.

20L. Manipulating Results. Collusion to fix or throw games, whether before or during the game, in order to manipulate prize money, title norms, ratings, or for any other purpose is illegal and may result in severe sanctions, including revocation of USCF membership. Such agreements include arrangements to split prize money no matter what the result of the game. See also Chapter 6, USCF Code of Ethics.

Anybody ever heard of these rules being enforced? It would be interesting to know. I have never heard of a case where they were enforced.

Hey, I share your dislike of players prearranging draws. If it were possible to catch them and prove their intent to share the point rather than play a game of chess, this wouldn't irritate either of us. But there are bigger issues of a philosophical nature that would have to be resolved before this could ever be addressed.

And, we agree to disagree. If you win all of your games you don't have to worry about others drawing. Which of course is completely accurate. Though I know that may sound abstract, that's the way I feel. If someone 'cheats' you can get annoyed and protest; and that would be your right I don't contest that. You could also accept that someone cheated, not let it bother you much, 'protest' only to inform the relevant authorities and get on with your chess.

That's me though.