So, this is what modern chess has come to

     Just one more reason why I'm not too interested in modern chess... 

Black to play and win

     Because of a cheating incident by Sebastien Feller at the 2010 Chess Olympiad, plus a lot of other well-known cheating incidents, at the recently completed Baku Olympiad FIDE greatly enhanced security. Some of the rules enforced were: a transmission delay of some games, random security checks of players, a ban on bringing pens and watches into the playing hall (!) and installment of electronic checkpoints for players at the entrance of the playing hall.
     Prior to the event Israel Gelfer, Chairman of FIDE's Anti-cheating Committee, said that the issue of cheating cannot be ignored and at Baku the usual electronic scans before and after the game as well as novel procedures would be used, to include: having a special anti-cheating arbiter with approximately 15 arbiters under his authority who would carry out 30-40 checks per round and that players MUST inform their Match Arbiter when leaving the playing area. e.g. for trips to the bathroom. 
     Nigel Short ran into problems and Japanese player Tang Tang was forfeited after he was caught with an electronic device in a random check conducted prior to leaving the venue;  despite security precautions an iPhone and an iPad were found on him. The game result was reversed from a win to a loss, which also resulted in a change in the match score. 

GM Alex Colovic's Blog 
Nigel Short Warned 
Baku 2016 Website 

     There's a famous story about the Lasker vs. Botvinnik game at Nottingham 1936. The game was adjourned and after both sides had done some analysis, Botvinnik decided the game was a draw so he went to Lasker to propose a draw, but only if Lasker had played a certain move. Lasker said he played another move, but he was sure the game was still drawn. The problem was that Lasker's sealed move was no longer a secret.  What did Botvinik do? He offered Lasker his pocket chess set as a good faith pledge that he would not continue his analysis. What did Lasker do? He refused saying that he completely trusted Botvinnik. Times have changed, haven't they?