Have you ever cheated at go?

[dfan]

Another aspect for real-life play, is it cheating to wander around and look at other boards? I do this a lot; I get restless and find it interesting to watch other games, but maybe I would win more and get in time trouble less (I don't wonder on my time, but could use opponent's time to read/plan more) if I focused more on my game. I think it's not cheating. But what if you then use the information from other games to help you in yours? I think that would be.

There's a famous chess story along these lines:

In the fourteenth round from Gothenburg Interzonal in 1955 three Soviet players (Keres, Geller and Spassky) played three Argentines players (Najdorf, Panno, Pilnik) The Argentine team had prepared a sharp counter attack beginning with 9… g5!? in the 6.Bg5 variation of the Nadjorf variation of the Sicilian, with which they hoped to surprise the strong Soviet players. Geller in his game versus Panno was first to find the move 11.Nxe6!, which constitutes the beginning of the refutation. A while later it was imitated by Keres in his game against Najdorf and later the teenager Spassky against Pilnik. But the key move that ruined all the illusions of the Argentinean players was 13. Bb5!! A truly brilliant move found by Paul Keres. Immediately, the other Soviets imitated him. This was not difficult since the games were broadcast on the hanging murals which tracked the games. The final outcome was the sensational victory of the three Soviet players over the three confused Argentineans players, all of whom lost to the same refutation of the same variation!!

A more detailed recounting of the same incident is here.

[dsatkas]

Another aspect for real-life play, is it cheating to wander around and look at other boards? I do this a lot; I get restless and find it interesting to watch other games, but maybe I would win more and get in time trouble less (I don't wonder on my time, but could use opponent's time to read/plan more) if I focused more on my game. I think it's not cheating. But what if you then use the information from other games to help you in yours? I think that would be. I don't think I've done this consciously, but it would be hard to police, though it seems somewhat plausible. For example at the Amsterdam tournament this last weekend I considered playing a new joseki variant but ended up playing the old one, not because I couldn't remember the new mainline but was unsure how to continue in some branches if my opponent deviated, and then when I went for a wander I saw one of the top boards playing the new line so although that wouldn't have helped me as I had remembered that line (and wouldn't help with the branches) it would have been a big help if I'd forgotten it, and could have provided some reassurance. Or another potential situation, imagine you've got somewhat common shape like a carpenter's square and forgot the usual continuation, and another board had it too and in your wander you saw the 2-1 attachment sequence as a nice reminder of how to make the ko.

No, an emphatic no. If it's allowed in chess, then it's fine.

[HermanHiddema]

EGF General Tournament Rules, Chapter 3, Section 2, Rule 4:

During their game or its adjournment, players may not study the game on another board…

[Javaness2]

EGF General Tournament Rules, Chapter 3, Section 2, Rule 4:

During their game or its adjournment, players may not study the game on another board…

On first sight I believed that this rule meant that in a game between A and B, A may not wander off, find a spare board, and use it to play out and analyse a particular line.

It seems though that this is not the case. The rule does actually mean that they should not watch a game on another board. I wonder how many people in each tournament could be penalized due to their flaunting this rule.

Of course, just because a rule is official, does not mean that it is accepted as being official by the officials.

[HermanHiddema]

On first sight I believed that this rule meant that in a game between A and B, A may not wander off, find a spare board, and use it to play out and analyse a particular line.

I do think this is actually the correct interpretation.

[HKA]

My first reaction was an emphatic "No!" And I do have a kind of love for the purity of the game that would make that so. I would never consult a joseki dictionary during an online game, or play out sequences on a real board in an online game, or play out sequences on a tablet during a face to face game. I will not even ask for an undo for a typo ( although I will accept one if it was a misclick and an undo is offered).

But with a little more thought, I wonder if my emphatic response is appropriate. In my younger days I did resort to some gamesmanship that many, many folks would not approve of. I would still argue that head fakes, misleading signs and hopeful frowns are not cheating, but they are questionable enough to not be holier than thou.

However, on another return to this thread I finally found where I certainly have crossed the line, at least as an accomplice. I have a dear friend who has had health issues and, as a result, his game has dipped. His energy for the game is limited, and when I visit it is tough for him to play endless games like we used to. However, playing online is easier for him. He loves to play a game with my live advice and enjoys himself immensely and perhaps learns something. Obviously, doing this in a rated game (at least I think they were rated) without the opponent's knowledge is cheating, certainly by my friend, but also by me.

the black and white path
obscured by years, friendly guide -
questionable trip

[Javaness2]

On first sight I believed that this rule meant that in a game between A and B, A may not wander off, find a spare board, and use it to play out and analyse a particular line.

I do think this is actually the correct interpretation.

If I remember my anecdote correctly, there was this tournament in Finland where two kyu players decided to effectively play Vesa and Matti against each other. Hence, this rule making it illegal to look at the other games.

[Majordomo]

Interesting thing I thought I recalled so I had to go back and confirm: For those of you who've watched Hikaru No Go, in the 5th episode - the first high school tournament that Hikaru is roped into playing in his teammate plays with a joseki book in his hand (as in holds it open in his hand during the game). When berated for it this he says it isn't against the rules, but his teammate is only berating him for using it as a crutch (not a rules violation).

Anyway, I often used to look up joseki and fuseki patterns when I started out. Figuring I'd rather learn there and then instead of doing something wrong then looking that up later. Now I only do it after a game to see if I screwed something up if something felt off about a corner sequence - did use the AlphaGo Tool a bit to help memorize some lines though - I did the same thing when learning chess, it just feels like the most efficient way for me to learn. Another factor in me doing it less now is that I'm a lot less serious about the game and so learning is not as much a priority when playing anymore.

[Kirby]

I think there are a couple of elements of the Hikaru no Go case, which may not hold in all situations:
* Apparently, for that tournament, joseki books were explicitly allowed - not the case for all tournaments.
* Online, it's my assumption that my opponent isn't using additional resources. Likewise, if I use a joseki book, I don't expect my opponent to know about it. I consider that cheating. If it's allowed by the server, and I tell my opponent I'm using a book, then maybe it's not cheating anymore.

[Majordomo]

That might well be, though at least the anime doesn't explicitly say books are allowed so I think I just generalized it (but yeh, that would be odd if that were the case heh).

I guess I've never thought much about it or assumed anything about my opponent in regards to joseki dictionaries, when they play out joseki they just do that - if they needed help to do so well, that's not something I think about.

But yeah, in a serious game then I'd probably be a bit annoyed if my opponent looked up the answer to something I'd prepared (say a more complicated or unusual variation. Like online I often play the side attachment as a follow up on the 4-4 low approach -> keima -> slide joseki to good result because people just don't know about it or what to do - but I don't play it assuming they'll mess up unless it's a handicap game)

[Matti]

On first sight I believed that this rule meant that in a game between A and B, A may not wander off, find a spare board, and use it to play out and analyse a particular line.

I do think this is actually the correct interpretation.

I have been writing those rules and I agree.

[Shoreline]

LOL, confession.

[Bojanic]

Regarding question of topic, no.
I play go for 30 years, and back in the day as a dan player you would know your opponents for a long time, and also cheating in go before internet was very, very difficult.

----

It seems you forgot to mention some ancient techniques, that are used in lightning games after few beers
After all, cheating is more ancient than the books and internet.
- casually move your hand as you are picking stones for your next move, take some stones from opponent's bowl, and put them into your lid
- play move near opponent's side, and with other hand move important stone that is obscured by other hand to more convenient place
- use similar technique to obscure move that you play in lightning game, and leave opponent to wonder where did you play.
Those stupidities are hardly possible to use in ordinary game, but it is cheating after ala