MY LAST FIDE ONLINE ARENA UNFAIR PLAY REPORTS

Since May 2026, I have been an Arena International Master (AIM) in online chess. However, there are nuances.

I shall stop playing on FIDE Online Arena (FOA) and the site Worldchess.

Below are my latest unfair play reports that I have sent.

&&&

NN is very probably using a chess engine. In a 10 + 10 rapid game (39 moves), NN was disconnected several times in the middle of the game. NN used only 1 min 56 sec of thinking time, while NN’s performance was impossibly perfect: accuracy 0.99, average centipawn loss 2, inaccuracies 0.

&&&

NN is one such player who repeatedly offers a draw against players with a higher ELO. If the draw is rejected, NN takes a long pause. After that, NN plays abnormally fast and precisely as an altogether different player. I am pretty sure that a chess engine was in use.

&&&

NN – I think his games should be checked. I won him, but I think he is playing abnormally fast and precisely. In a 10 + 10 rapid game (47 moves), NN played astronomically fast: every single move was made using the time increment only. NN’s final thinking time is seriously negative: - 1 min 53 sec. Despite a very high speed, NN’s statistics are unbelievably good: accuracy 90%, average centipawn loss 15. When I played at normal speed, NN made only 1 inaccurate move. All the other inaccurate moves and mistakes NN made in a simple technical endgame, when I played extremely fast due to the Zeitnot. I suspect that NN (AFM!) is playing with the chess engine, and when the opponent plays very fast, he does not have time to read the chess engine's screen or thinks it is unnecessary. Thank you.

&&&

NN is very probably using a chess engine during a live game. In a 10 + 10 rapid game (53 moves), NN played at an astronomical pace. During the whole of the game, NN’s thinking time was negative. There were only some rare occasions when NN did not use the time increment only. At the end of the game, NN’s thinking time was seriously negative: - 1 min 29 sec. Despite a very high speed, there were long sequences of precise moves that NN made almost instantly. The statistics are also unbelievable: accuracy 0.91, average centipawn loss 15 (or 0.19). Inaccuracies 3 (or 5), mistakes 2 (or 3), blunders 0 (or 1). However, if we do not count the opening moves, it turns out that most of NN’s inaccuracies were practically the best moves to try to win, as White was in a Zeitnot and these moves were the only options to avoid very drawish endgames. 

I will stop playing on Worldchess because there are far too many cheaters, and Worldchess is far too slow to take them down. I cannot spend the rest of my life writing unfair play reports every single day, which seem useless anyway.

&&&

These were my last 4 unfair play reports. 

There are cheaters on every chess platform, and I have abandoned many of them.

The FOA is particularly peculiar. It is FIDE’s official gaming platform. However, no video cameras are used. The players cannot be blocked. One cannot set the rating difference for challenges. 

To obtain the title, one must play in tournaments, where one meets players with low ratings who use chess engines. It rather looks like the system wants you to play against the cheaters and tries to obstruct you if you try to avoid them.

Sometimes the system finally recovers your rating points, but you have already lost the chance to obtain the title, and the system does not restore that chance. You have to start everything all over again.

Worse. To obtain the title of, say, AGM, one has to be successful against those who already have the title of AGM or AIM. Unfortunately, the FOA has given such titles to several such players whose statistical data force one to conclude that, with very high probability, they are chess engine users. Their statistics are so astronomically perfect that I guess an ordinary OTB grandmaster would have little chance of beating them without using a chess engine.

All this not only makes it very difficult for a strong but honest player to obtain FOA's higher titles, but also makes such titles worthless. 

My fresh AIM title is worthless because the general background is such that people simply do not believe that I am not also a cheater - a player who uses a chess engine in live online games.

Such a title might even compromise my reputation. 

To be continued...

MY ANSWER TO THE "QUESTION" CONCERNING KRAMNIK, NARODITSKY, AND FIDE

On the Chess Stack Exchange, a strange question was asked:

"Kramnik referral to FIDE Ethics Commission regarding Naroditsky"

I was technically unable to comment on it, therefore, I published my comment to that "question" as an "answer". As a result, my reply might be converted to a comment, perhaps with some technical distortions.

Therefore, I shall publish my comment here as a copy (see below). 

The page as it stands right now has also been saved on the Wayback Machine. 

The Question is Badly Formulated

The question is badly formulated, and I have flagged it.

All questions have some presuppositions. In the present case, the number of presuppositions has not been minimised, and the assumptions made have not been proven or are wrong.

Therefore, the post pretends to be a question but reads more like a poorly justified accusation.

The "question" starts with the following accusation:

"After Naroditsky's sudden death at age 29 following repeated allegations of online cheating by Kramnik..."

No reference is given to support that accusation. Moreover, we can read the recent article from Reuters:

"Chess - Kramnik files complaint over online threats after Naroditsky's death", Reuters, 26 October 2025.

It is partly behind the paywall, but it has been summed up in the following article:

"Former world chess champion Kramnik files complaint over online threats after Naroditsky's death", Asiaone, 27 October 2025

The relevant quotations are the following:

"Kramnik, who raised questions about possible cheating by Naroditsky and other players last year..."

"Naroditsky's name appeared on a list published by Kramnik last year of players showing unusually low blunder rates in the final seconds of online games.

Kramnik has denied accusing Naroditsky personally of cheating, saying his remarks were 'reasoned questions' based on statistical analysis."

As a presupposition of the question, also FIDE President Arkady Dvorkovich's statement on the FIDE website has been quoted.

That statement, however, associates GM Valdimir Kramnik with GM Daniel Naroditsky's death. At the moment, when that FIDE statement was published, the US police had not published a statement about the direct cause of Naroditsky's death. Only a few days later, the police announced that Naroditsky's death was being investigated as "a possible suicide or overdose".

Therefore, my answer to the "question" is that FIDE should first investigate whether its accusations are true and proven.

I also suggest that Chess Stack Exchange should not publish such "questions" which are actually public accusations of highly controversial issues.

Indeed, my comment was effectively deleted

It has been drastically shortened during the process of "converting" it from "answer" to "comment".

Notably, the "question" was asked by the user Brian Towers, and my comment was in effect deleted also by the user Brian Towers. 

According to Chess Stack Exchange, Brian Towers is a "moderator". I have flagged the propagandistic "question" but the system has not responded. Therefore, the weird "question" asked, which amounts to a part of the current larger smearing campaign, looks as if the official position of the Chess Stack Exchange. 

I will never forgive to that person who recommended me to try using Stack Exchange!