Could You Technically...

Originally posted by ih8sens
Start two games with opposite colours against a higher rated opponent and just mirror every move they make, thereby getting either two draws, or a win and a loss which helps your rating either way?

Edit - This opportunity would present itself fairly regularly in clan games and tournaments in fact. I'm sure (if it's possible) that this happens fairly often. Seems like a good strategic idea.

A few observations. It has been tried several times before (also against me). You can try to reverse the order in which the games are played and go into variation stuff, but better is to avoid it, for instance by starting your white game second.

It is obviously cheating in the ethical sense. But is it technically? In principle, everything that has been played before can be used in correspondence, but is that true for unfinished games? Adding that (it is not allowed) to the rules would solve it 'technically' too, no? Or perhaps this is already in the rules of some CC rules?

To the original question asked, I think this video is an interesting illustration:

http://emuse.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/19931

Aside from my previous statement that the player would find it more difficult in the future to obtain games versus higher rated opponents, I believe that the idea can be thwarted altogether.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the sake of simplification, I'm going to make some assumptions:
a) There are two players "GM" and "Amateur" who are playing two games against eachother.
b) The time control for both games is 1/0 (1 day timeout, 0 day timebank)
c) Both players reside in the same time zone.
d) Both players normally awake at 6am and go to sleep at 11pm.
e) Amateur has access to a computer all day and if awake, will respond instantly to a move made by GM.

Day 1: The games begin 1.f4 e5 2.e4 exf4. While the opening is perfectly playable for both sides, GM is already suspicious because of the unusual sequence the moves were played. So, GM stays up slightly later than usual, plays 3.Nf3 in Game 1 at 11:05pm and goes to sleep.

Day 2: Amateur awakes at 6am, sees that GM has played 3.Nf3 in Game 1 and immediately plays 3.Nf3 in Game 2. GM awakes at 6:05am and skips coffee in order to get to work on time. After returning home from work, GM refrains from moving in game 2. As 11:05pm approaches, Amateur has a choice: Not move in Game 1 and risk being "skulled" or move. So, Amateur plays 3...g5 in Game 1 at 11pm. GM, who has been waiting by the computer for the last few minutes, plays 3...d6 in Game 2 and has forced the games to diverge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The short version of all this is while the idea can be implemented effectively OTB where Amateur can always make copycat moves instantly, it fails in CC because sometimes there will be a delay in Amateur's copycat move in Game 2. So the higher rated player will either win one of the two games by "skull" or force a divergence.

Originally posted by AlboMalapropFoozer
Aside from my previous statement that the player would find it more difficult in the future to obtain games versus higher rated opponents, I believe that the idea can be thwarted altogether.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the sake of simplification, I'm going to make some assumptions:
a) Th er rated player will either win one of the two games by "skull" or force a divergence.

All this idea does is to cause two players to play each other whilst believing they are playing someone else. It is possible (time controls permitting) but what's the point. It would clearly be cheating even if this method of cheating isn't actually specified in the rules. You might argue that it's a clever way of cheating and that's what makes it interesting - but this surely must be only one of several "clever" ways of cheating and only of passing interest to most players.

The Derren Brown video clip mentioned in an earlier post covers it adequately where an unrated player (Derren Brown) plays off several GM's against each other whilst tricking them into thinking they were playing him and leaving them wondering how it happened. That said GM Chris Ward found himself on the black side of a Trompovsky with a world renowned Trompowsky player seated a few metres away - you'd have thought he'd have an inkling.

This has happened before at RHP.

It is cheating on the grounds of outside assistance. Even if that assistance is unwittingly given by your two opponents. The argument that you are playing a previously played move and it is thus no different from using a database fails, because any research material used in a game (books, databases, etc) has to be in existence before the game is played.

3(b) While a game is in progress you may not refer to chess engines, chess computers or be assisted by a third party. Endgame tablebases may not be consulted during play but you may reference books, databases consisting of previously played games between human players, and other pre-existing research materials.

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
This has happened before at RHP.

It is cheating on the grounds of outside assistance. Even if that assistance is unwittingly given by your two opponents. The argument that you are playing a previously played move and it is thus no different from using a database fails, because any research material used in a game (books, databases, etc) has to be in ...[text shortened]... f previously played games between human players, and other pre-existing research materials. [/b]

YouTube

I've no doubt RHP has some rule in place to counter this, possibly including the "outside assistance" clause if nothing else.

However, since the spirit of the rules is for the two players represented in the game to rely on their own abilities in order to achieve the end result (whatever it might be), then even if the copycat technique were technically allowed, it would still go against the spirit of chess laws, because the person implementing the copycat technique is allowing another to play for him in practicality, rather than relying on his own abilities (chess + research).

I suspect, though, that the victim who knows or suspects such a technique could simply time his moves such that the mimic eventually has to make his move before receiving the telegraph from the other game. At this point, the victim simply makes a different move, thus breaking the technique. If the mimic decides to attempt to wait for the move to arrive, he may then be skulled, in which case the technique is still broken.

1) Chances are, the mimic won't see the move as soon as it is played. There will be at least a short delay before he sees the move.
2) It also takes a brief period of time for the mimic to note the move, change games, and post the copied move.

Originally posted by Jamin
*petitions posting of games in which this occurred* It would be interesting to see how that turned out historically would it not?

Originally posted by eatmybishop
boring people..! of course it would work... give the guy some credit, its actually a good idea.... i'm sure there was a programme about this years back where a child came up with the same idea and played two grandmasters, playing white in one game and black in the other by simply copying the moves... he beat one and lost the other but the point was a chi ...[text shortened]... moves and if caught the RHP POLICE will be knocking at your virtual door.... nice idea though

Originally posted by ih8sens
Start two games with opposite colours against a higher rated opponent and just mirror every move they make, thereby getting either two draws, or a win and a loss which helps your rating either way?

Edit - This opportunity would present itself fairly regularly in clan games and tournaments in fact. I'm sure (if it's possible) that this happens fairly often. Seems like a good strategic idea.

Originally posted by Northern Lad
I think this has been tried a few times in OTB team encounters. Apparently it works quite well till the stronger team twigs what's going on. Then, if they have any sense, they deliberately run short of time on all boards, which then makes life very difficult for the copiers!

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
Just so there is no doubt about this, I can state categorically that playing one player's moves against another's will be considered cheating by the game mod team.

Now in the interest of RHP historical trivia and an illustration of this offence...

Such a "game" was highlighted in this thread:

Thread 28415 (On page 2)

One playe ...[text shortened]... written defence in the thread. People can make up their own minds.

I know what I think.