28 ms·

For context, Magnus withdrew from a major tournament last month after losing to Hans. He has not made a statement, but it is understood that he suspects Hans of

• systemvoltage 4y ago
  This is a very uncharitable opinion that’s pretending to be a summary of a complex situation. Follow discussions on r/chess and people like GothamChess, PowerPlayChess. Facts and very little speculation. Evidence is needed.
• Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
  > As more evidence comes out I haven't seen evidence of Neumann's cheating, as is claimed in this comment. Only allegations, which do not look very strong to me.
  • tibbar 4y ago
    There are two lines of evidence: first regarding his cheating online, which is easier to do and easier to check. Chess.com banned Hans and put out a statement saying that Hans cheated more often and more seriously than he claimed. [1] The second line of inquiry is statistical analyses of Hans's over-the-board games. See my original comment for one such analysis, but he really has been playing at an absurd level in some games (performing as well 0 centipawn loss against some engines!) It's not a good look. [1] https://twitter.com/chesscom/status/1568010971616100352 https://twitter.com/chesscom/status/1568010971616100352
    • Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
      What a person did at 16 years old is hardly relevant now, and it is definitely immoral to keep bringing it up without new evidence. How long would it take for people like you to stop bringing up 'he has a history of cheating'? 10 years? 20 years? 30 years? 50 years? He had played at a way more serious events, and still the only 'evidence' of cheating is his relatively good performance. Until someone comes up with an explanation how he is able to cheat with games streamed with delay and after metal detector scanner, I suggest treating Carlsen's behavior as tantrums of a person who can't take a loss. Also, whatever chess.com says about cheating online is irrelevant, as their methods are known to produce a lot of false positives. Additionally, since recently chess.com is in business relationship with Carlsen, so they can hardly be counted as an independent party in all of this.
      • OkayPhysicist 4y ago
        > What a person did at 16 years old is hardly relevant now That argument works better when someone's 25 than when they're 19. This isn't the distant past, this is 3 years ago. That's definitely recent enough to be a black mark on his reputation. On the other side, the main person who's suspicious of them isn't some internet random. It's the world greatest chess player, which should is decidedly a mark in one's favor reputation-wise. This is the very basis of how reputation works. You slowly establish reputation by having a track record of positive behavior, you rapidly tarnish reputation by having a track record of negative behavior, and when you are making judgements based on limited information about the activity at hand, you trust the more trustworthy. Think of how much good will Microsoft has had to build in the last 10 years to try and make up for the 20 before that. Think of the fable of the boy who cried wolf. Trusting those who have earned it and distrusting those who have wronged before is basic society 101.
        • Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
          The "sin" he committed was playing no stakes online blitz, and you are projecting this 'mark' on his reputation to a professional over the board tournament with anticheating measures. The tournament organisers were very confident that no cheating took place at the event. To me it is a rather closed case. Regarding Carlsen's behavior, so far it looks like he has grown a very big ego. Not interested in a second championship match with Nepo, throwing tantrums against an up and coming player who defeated him. Maybe he's feeling he is losing his edge against a new generation of players, and doesn't like it.
  • vintermann 4y ago
    I have heard a concrete allegation that in the Capablanca Memorial 2022 tournament (which was over the board), Niemann has games where he plays normally up to a point in the midgame, then he plays the top line of a specific engine (Stockfish 11) for an implausible number of moves in sequence. There are a lot of lower-quality accusations, but this is the interesting one IMO. It should be easy enough to independently check for someone who has a setup for that sort of thing.
    • not1ofU 4y ago
      ChessBruh mentioned that this youtube channel has analysis of Hans' Games, focusing on centipawn loses after standard openers are filtered out: https://www.youtube.com/c/ChessfanMWP/videos https://www.youtube.com/c/ChessfanMWP/videos The last 5 or so vids on that channel are in English, but youtube does a decent-ish translation of his other videos too.
      • vintermann 4y ago
        Yes, he is the source of that allegation. He is very hard to follow, though. He's not a great caster, and his accent is so thick that YouTube's automatic captioning misidentifies it as Russian.
  • nextlevelwizard 4y ago
    You mean over the board, right? Because he himself has admitted to cheating online twice, but if you think about it even a bit people don't just cheat once, then get caught, then couple years later repeat the process. Most likely he had cheated at least before and between the times he got caught.
    • Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
      Whatever kids do online at 16 yo playing on a second-rate chess site (and chess.com is a second-rate) is hardly relevant to how they play over the board in a top level chess events.
  • smcl 4y ago
    In my experience, people who do do deceitful stuff - steal, lie and cheat - act quite predictably when confronted with their allegations: 1. I didn't cheat! 2. Ok yeah I cheated those times but I never did it again 3. GOTO 1 It seems we've gone through this cycle once already - where Niemann has admitted that he was caught cheating on two occasions in the past. And now chess.com are saying actually he has cheated more times than that, so we're seemingly going through this cycle at least once more: https://twitter.com/chesscom/status/1568010971616100352 https://twitter.com/chesscom/status/1568010971616100352 This is very feelings-based but as an outsider who doesn't really play Chess and can't evaluate what happened on the board, it certainly doesn't look good. He's at very least been quite dishonest
    • fwsgonzo 4y ago
      This is exactly how it works. It's disappointing how many ifs and buts people are giving him just because they don't particularly like Carlsen. It really shows. Cheaters are serial cheaters, and they will deny deny deny. The problem is really that he has admitted to cheating more than once. There is a reason why sports and just about everything else employs zero-tolerance policies: It doesn't just happen once.
      • jpgvm 4y ago
        It can though. Kids can be young and make stupid mistakes. I'm not saying that is what happened here - I really don't follow chess enough to have an informed opinion on this specific case. However I object to the blanket opinion that there aren't people who cheated once and absolutely regretted it and never did it again, especially kids, especially online.
        • smcl 4y ago
          On one level you're right, if you do something dishonest then admit it that doesn't automatically mean you're never to be trusted ever again. However I think the more times someone goes through the deny/concede cycle I described, the less trustworthy they are, especially if it's for exactly the same thing each time.
• rwmj 4y ago
  Is there any clue how he may be cheating? Apparently they have metal detectors at the events.
  • manojlds 4y ago
    Elon and others seems to think beads in the back.
    • JakDrako 4y ago
      "Hans could play even better with my Hyperpoop."
• Semaphor 4y ago
  > Hans has admitted to cheating online Several years ago. I think when he was 16? (Not saying that is when he cheated, but that’s when he admitted to cheating).
  • Akashic101 4y ago
    Hans as admitted to cheating on chess.com when he was 12 and 16, so not that long ago since he is only 19 right now.
    • vintermann 4y ago
      I know he admitted this in September 2022. What I can't find out (and Google makes damn near impossible to find out due to its recency bias) is when he first admitted this.
    • Keyframe 4y ago
      12, 16, and 19 are worlds apart.
      • willsmith72 4y ago
        16 and 19 aren't, and who's to say there's a 3 year gap there?
        • Semaphor 4y ago
          I’d say 16 and 19 are further apart than 30 and 40 (said as a 36-year-old).
    • teekert 4y ago
      So he’s a kid exploring what he can get away with?
      • deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
• ramraj07 4y ago
  As someone who’s never been able to appreciate or follow sports where a machine can be an order of magnitude better than a human, I would genuinely like to understand why people are enamored about such sports. In the end it seems like brilliant minds lost in math that’s not even novel anymore.. again everyone should do what they please, but this is just an academic question from someone unable to appreciate such skills or sports.
  • spoonjim 4y ago
    Aren't machines better than humans at most sports? Hand off a football to an Abrams tank and it's not getting tackled on its way to the goal line.
    • ramraj07 4y ago
      Absolutely. That’s why I’ve never been able to follow or watch any sport. Except maybe Ronny Sullivan playing snooker? Anyways the point is I have never been able to appreciate the value of sports as something you watch.
  • dane-pgp 4y ago
    Would you say it doesn't make sense to appreciate art because cameras exist? Actually, with the advent of image generating AIs, such questions become more relevant.
    • rglullis 4y ago
      Imagine a book, a ballet choreography, a movie entirely conceived and produced by an AI, which we collectively regard it as "art". Also imagine that, barring evidence of how the work was done, it is impossible for humans to distinguish if the work of art was produced by a human or an AI. Why should we, as "appreciators/consumers" of this art, care about how it was done? Do we think that a drawing made with the help with a computer "less artistic" than one drawn on paper? Also imagine that this AI is friendly and superhuman, and it is established that its works are aligned with our interests. All "art" produced by this AI inspires us to be better version of ourselves and enlighten us to help us solve our conflicts. In this scenario, why should we care about the work of one particular human vs another? The point that I am trying to make is that chess is already a reduced version of this hypothetical. Those that care about chess as a game will have little to learn by looking at humans. Those that want to improve their own game will do it by playing against/studying/interacting with the advancements in computers. There is very little left room for humans by themselves to show any new development in the game. As such, it seems to me that the ones interested in events related to human players are those who worry more about measuring humans against each other than in the game itself.
• Arnavion 4y ago
  Even if it turns out Niemann cheated, the way Carlsen is acting coy about it puts me off. The tweet was bad enough (unlike Mourinho he's clearly not in "big trouble" from his insinuation), but this resignation is such a publicity stunt.
  • dane-pgp 4y ago
    Maybe Carlsen doesn't know who to blame. He could suspect Niemann, or someone on Niemann's team, or someone in his own team, or a backdoor in Stockfish, or (depending on Carlsen's own mental health right now) space aliens. I can understand that out of an abundance of caution (and on the advice of his lawyers) he doesn't want to name anyone in particular, although seeing so many fingers pointed at Niemann (understandably, given his past) I do think Carlsen should at least release a statement saying "I don't want people accusing Niemann of cheating, that was not my intention".
    • morelisp 4y ago
      If there's any cheating, how could Niemann himself not be involved?
      • dane-pgp 4y ago
        Someone on Niemann's team could have been feeding him info which "coincidentally" happens to be very useful, without Niemann suspecting where the info came from. (A bug in Carlsen's hotel room?) Someone on Carlsen's team could be encouraging him to focus on lines which they've discovered (through a bug in the hotel room) that Niemann's team is preparing counters for. In both of these cases, the corrupt team member could be motivated by the possibility of winning a large bet on the outcome of the chess match, without either player being in on it. (I admit that the idea of Stockfish giving deliberately bad information only to Carlsen, to weaken his prep, is not very plausible, but we don't know how rational Carlsen is being here).
        • morelisp 4y ago
          While these are both unsportsmanlike (and probably illegal) I'm not actually sure they're cheating.
• WastingMyTime89 4y ago
  I don’t understand why people are going out their way to justify Carlsen attitude. What we have is the world champion throwing a tantrum because he lost against a player there is absolutely no evidence has cheated against him and is now calling for him to be expelled despite having no evidence whatsoever. This is harassment pure and simple. The whole thing is disgraceful and reflects extremely badly on competitive chess.
  • romanovcode 4y ago
    >is now calling for him to be expelled He made no comment.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    • WastingMyTime89 4y ago
      He just refused to play against him. You don’t need to talk to make a comment. I don’t understand how an adult can defend Magnus there. As a public figure his attitude is simply shocking.
      • alpaca128 4y ago
        You interpreting Carlsen's actions as "tantrum" and calling for measures against the other player has just as much evidence as there is for the cheating. For a public figure his response is unusually quiet and calm to me. Though I'm not into chess so I don't know how it is perceived from that angle.
        • jagrsw 4y ago
          > unusually quiet and calm to me. The crux seems to be that a genetl(wo)man would either directly accuse, or remain silent. What M.Carlsen is doing is de-facto accusing while saying "don't look at me, I didn't say it out loud". It's so... un.. hacker.. style.
  • 4y ago
• CydeWeys 4y ago
  > As more evidence comes out, it seems that Hans has cheated a lot more than he admitted, and potentially over the board as well (for example, this analysis [1] shows that he's playing at superhuman levels in some games.) This is being overstated. There's not any hard evidence suggesting he's been cheating over the board, and for such a potentially career-ruining allegation you'd want some pretty strong evidence.
  • Consultant32452 4y ago
    What does the expression "over the board" mean?
    • viscanti 4y ago
      Playing on a physical chess board instead of on the computer.
    • a_bored_husky 4y ago
      Face to face.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    • emmelaich 4y ago
      Not online, i.e. face to face.
    • howeyc 4y ago
      offline / in-person
    • icemelt8 4y ago
      offline chess, in person with a real board.
  • o_nate 4y ago
    Not being that familiar with the chess culture, it's weird to me that the distinction of "over the board" vs "online" seems to carry so much weight. Is it considered more acceptable to cheat online than "over the board"? I would think cheating is cheating.
• addicted 4y ago
  There is nothing that can help Magnus’s case because Magnus has made no case. He played Hans at the meltwater tournament, and beat him. A few weeks later, he played Hans again at the Sinquefeld cup, and lost to him. After which he posted a cryptic Jose Mourinho meme. And a few weeks later he played Hans online and resigned in 1 move. What’s Magnus’s case? What has he said his case is? What’s his argument? That losing to Hans was too traumatic for him and that he can’t play him anymore? Because he had no problem playing him while he was still winning against him.
  • greyman 4y ago
    >After which he posted a cryptic Jose Mourinho meme AND left the tournament, which he never did before, and it almost never happens that someone leaves the tournament without stating why. Magnus case is, that he accuses Niemann of cheating, it is very simple. :-) He didn't say that, but he acted like that, he communicated it with his actions.
    • bosie 4y ago
      > He didn't say that, but he acted like that, he communicated it with his actions. couldn't it be something else that is causing grief between the two?
• CrazyStat 4y ago
  > (for example, this analysis [1] shows that he's playing at superhuman levels in some games.) Ken Regan, who is the world expert on identifying engine-assisted cheating in chess, disagrees [1]. No offense to random YouTube creator but I'll trust Regan's analysis over Chess fan MWP. [1] https://en.chessbase.com/post/is-hans-niemann-cheating-world-renowned-expert-ken-regan-analyzes https://en.chessbase.com/post/is-hans-niemann-cheating-world...