4 ms·

With Kasparov himself saying that the Carlson's opening with white was weak, and there not being a shred of actual evidence of the cheating. I'm leaning towards

With Kasparov himself saying that the Carlson's opening with white was weak, and there not being a shred of actual evidence of the cheating. I'm leaning towards the witch hunt theory. Why should I think otherwise? All grandmasters have had surprise loses now and again, right?

ratg13 4y ago
So you are calling chess.com liars, or did you not read the article?
- Ekaros 4y ago
  Unless they have a proof to present I think there is reasonable case to sue them here.
  - viscanti 4y ago
    They have unfairly infringed his constitutional right to continue to play games on chess.com after he admitted to cheating on there in the past.
    - Bud 4y ago
      His "constitutional right"? This is a joke, right? Please say yes. Please tell me it doesn't have to be explained that there's no "constitutional right" to use a chess website.
    - eteos 4y ago
      There is no such thing as a constitutional right to play on chess.com
      - cinntaile 4y ago
        That's the joke.
- jstanley 4y ago
  It's not obvious to me that chess.com would have any more insight into whether or not Hans Niemann cheated OTB than anyone else would.
  - ratg13 4y ago
    No, but they reviewed his history after the accusations and found him to be lying and misrepresenting himself. So, if we take chess.com at their word and he is lying, we have a person who is a "former" cheater, who is currently actively lying about the scope of their cheating. It's not conclusive by any means, but this is a far cry from "nothing to see here"
    - addicted 4y ago
      Chess.com must be really struggling for money if they have to wait for a non accusation of OTB cheating to run their anti-cheating algorithms on a player’s games. Which they obviously aren’t. Which means that they have found nothing new in the “review”. The more obvious answer is that Magnus is pissed, and as a part owner of chess.com and biggest draw in tennis, chess.com wants his continued participation and so is kicking Hans out. They may have justification for it, but it was clearly not enough of a justification to act on before Magnus decided to get all pissy on losing.
  - robertlagrant 4y ago
    They analyse games for unusual moves. See also https://en.chessbase.com/post/cheating-controversy-at-prochessleague https://en.chessbase.com/post/cheating-controversy-at-proche...
  - Steko 4y ago
    Whether Hans cheated OtB is not really the main issue although most commenters get hung up on it. Occam’s Razor suggests we should strongly believe he didn’t cheat OTB. The bigger issue is that known cheaters create a cloud of suspicion that puts their opponents at a huge disadvantage. Magnus has spoken about this before - if you think someone might be cheating you can’t concentrate on chess. This suspicion can be allayed with extra security but that extra security was only deployed after Magnus left.
- ejb999 4y ago
  I read the article, and this is what I found: >>"So far, there has not been any concrete evidence that points to Niemann cheating." So question is, did you read the article?
  - jackmott 4y ago
- faeriechangling 4y ago
  I believe most people understand that chess.com are working off statistics and best faith efforts but can be mistaken. Moreover chess.com saying they cheated on their website is a wholly separate issue than if Hans cheated OTB. There’s plenty of room to believe that chess.com is being sincere but that Hans may be innocent of both recent allegations, especially the OTB cheating allegation.
potatototoo99 4y ago
He admitted to cheating when he was an IM. To me he forfeited being given the benefit of doubt after that.
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  Twice, when he was 12 and 16, in online nonconsequential games. It's not great, but "once a cheat always a cheat" is still wrong.
  - hellcow 4y ago
    Chess.com made a public statement after his comments, effectively saying he wasn’t honest and had cheated far more extensively than he had admitted. They banned him and said that they shared the evidence with him in private, and it would be up to him to respond to it. So either chess.com is wrong, despite having a pretty good ability to detect cheating, or Hans is lying. I’m inclined to believe the latter.
    - RandomWorker 4y ago
      This didn’t make sense to me. His reasons for cheating were because he wanted to play higher rated players. However I’ve seen many rated players get up there on like 2 hours. He said he does nothing for two years but play. One side very patient, other very impatient..
    - addicted 4y ago
      Chess.com is also 25% or so owned by Magnus’s company. Also, if chess.com had all this evidence why did they wait until after Magnus’s cryptic tweet to act on it? Do they only run their algorithms on games after Magnus makes cryptic comments on players playing the games? The far more obvious reason is that they took these actions because they don’t want to potentially lose Magnus and his company’s involvement in the tournament.
  - jackmott 4y ago

ratg13 4y ago

So you are calling chess.com liars, or did you not read the article?

Ekaros 4y ago
Unless they have a proof to present I think there is reasonable case to sue them here.
- viscanti 4y ago
  They have unfairly infringed his constitutional right to continue to play games on chess.com after he admitted to cheating on there in the past.
  - Bud 4y ago
    His "constitutional right"? This is a joke, right? Please say yes. Please tell me it doesn't have to be explained that there's no "constitutional right" to use a chess website.
  - eteos 4y ago
    There is no such thing as a constitutional right to play on chess.com
    - cinntaile 4y ago
      That's the joke.
jstanley 4y ago
It's not obvious to me that chess.com would have any more insight into whether or not Hans Niemann cheated OTB than anyone else would.
- ratg13 4y ago
  No, but they reviewed his history after the accusations and found him to be lying and misrepresenting himself. So, if we take chess.com at their word and he is lying, we have a person who is a "former" cheater, who is currently actively lying about the scope of their cheating. It's not conclusive by any means, but this is a far cry from "nothing to see here"
  - addicted 4y ago
    Chess.com must be really struggling for money if they have to wait for a non accusation of OTB cheating to run their anti-cheating algorithms on a player’s games. Which they obviously aren’t. Which means that they have found nothing new in the “review”. The more obvious answer is that Magnus is pissed, and as a part owner of chess.com and biggest draw in tennis, chess.com wants his continued participation and so is kicking Hans out. They may have justification for it, but it was clearly not enough of a justification to act on before Magnus decided to get all pissy on losing.
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  They analyse games for unusual moves. See also https://en.chessbase.com/post/cheating-controversy-at-prochessleague https://en.chessbase.com/post/cheating-controversy-at-proche...
- Steko 4y ago
  Whether Hans cheated OtB is not really the main issue although most commenters get hung up on it. Occam’s Razor suggests we should strongly believe he didn’t cheat OTB. The bigger issue is that known cheaters create a cloud of suspicion that puts their opponents at a huge disadvantage. Magnus has spoken about this before - if you think someone might be cheating you can’t concentrate on chess. This suspicion can be allayed with extra security but that extra security was only deployed after Magnus left.
ejb999 4y ago
I read the article, and this is what I found: >>"So far, there has not been any concrete evidence that points to Niemann cheating." So question is, did you read the article?
- jackmott 4y ago
faeriechangling 4y ago
I believe most people understand that chess.com are working off statistics and best faith efforts but can be mistaken. Moreover chess.com saying they cheated on their website is a wholly separate issue than if Hans cheated OTB. There’s plenty of room to believe that chess.com is being sincere but that Hans may be innocent of both recent allegations, especially the OTB cheating allegation.

potatototoo99 4y ago

He admitted to cheating when he was an IM. To me he forfeited being given the benefit of doubt after that.

robertlagrant 4y ago
Twice, when he was 12 and 16, in online nonconsequential games. It's not great, but "once a cheat always a cheat" is still wrong.
- hellcow 4y ago
  Chess.com made a public statement after his comments, effectively saying he wasn’t honest and had cheated far more extensively than he had admitted. They banned him and said that they shared the evidence with him in private, and it would be up to him to respond to it. So either chess.com is wrong, despite having a pretty good ability to detect cheating, or Hans is lying. I’m inclined to believe the latter.
  - RandomWorker 4y ago
    This didn’t make sense to me. His reasons for cheating were because he wanted to play higher rated players. However I’ve seen many rated players get up there on like 2 hours. He said he does nothing for two years but play. One side very patient, other very impatient..
  - addicted 4y ago
    Chess.com is also 25% or so owned by Magnus’s company. Also, if chess.com had all this evidence why did they wait until after Magnus’s cryptic tweet to act on it? Do they only run their algorithms on games after Magnus makes cryptic comments on players playing the games? The far more obvious reason is that they took these actions because they don’t want to potentially lose Magnus and his company’s involvement in the tournament.
- jackmott 4y ago