4 ms·

This is a strong point in Hans's favor, and Regan is very reputable, but he's also going against the Chess.com team (and Hans himself!) in claiming that he find

by tibbar 4y ago

This is a strong point in Hans's favor, and Regan is very reputable, but he's also going against the Chess.com team (and Hans himself!) in claiming that he finds no evidence of Hans cheating *online* either.

mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
His analysis is on games in the last two years, and Hans' admitted cheating online is before that.
nextlevelwizard 4y ago
I think the important bit is the "last two years". Niemann has admitted cheating like 5-6 years ago.
- ycombinete 4y ago
  2-3 years ago* when he was 16, he is now 19.
  - nextlevelwizard 4y ago
    I remember reading when he was 12 and 14
- manojlds 4y ago
  When he was 16 - that 3 years ago at max.
radiator 4y ago
On the contrary, I don't find it significant at all. I had not even heard of Dr. Regan. He seems to have achieved the IM Title decades ago, today he is probably simply a weak player. The best expert on opining whether Niemann has been cheating or not is the player who understands the game of chess more deeply than anyone else. He understands it from the human point of view (for example: which variations can a player of X or Y level calculate accurately, which ones might seem to work but are in practice too complicated/too risky to play, which moves are absolutely unbelievable from a human because one has to find ten super moves in a row starting from a non-forcing position) as well as from the engine's point of view, due to his experience in analysing with computers. He also has recent experience in playing Niemann in a tournament. I trust that Carlsen knows what he is doing.
- Tenoke 4y ago
  In a similar way that the best chess engine developer is not the best chess player there's little reason to think that the best person to detect chess engine use is the best player.
  - radiator 4y ago
    Indeed there is every reason. The hardest part is to understand the game of chess. As i wrote, it includes having the entire tree of variations for every position in your mind while investigating. It is absolutely not a matter of simply comparing one-dimensional engine evaluations.
    - Tenoke 4y ago
      No, the hardest part is likely to understand statistics, have data on cheaters and non-cheaters, analyze the differences, develop and test your methods on validation data, iterate on your process etc. >includes having the entire tree of variations for every position in your mind while investigating Too bad even Magnus can't do that and the closest you can get is by writing software to do it for you.
      - radiator 4y ago
        I do not even understand what it is that you think Carlsen cannot do. But every master can do it for one position at a time. Then he just analyses a number of positions, from Niemann's games and reaches a conclusion. You did not describe the algorithm or the data which would help writing the software you are talking about. As I said, for me if this software would be based on comparing the engine's best move with the human's move and give such metrics as average centipawn loss, it would not be nearly adequate for this purpose. And I insist that all the things you described as the hardest part are only poor substitutes for understanding the game of chess.
- bitcharmer 4y ago
  > He seems to have achieved the IM Title decades ago, today he is probably simply a weak player. Wow. Regan has been an active and respected member of scientific community, a lecturer and book author for a long time. If anything that adds and not takes away from his credibility. He's also the most prominent expert on cheating detection that FIDE has ever worked with and he's an authority on the matter. Oh, and he's rated at around 2400 ELO. But I guess it's very easy to just slander him like that. Go back to reddit.

by tibbar 4y ago

mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago

His analysis is on games in the last two years, and Hans' admitted cheating online is before that.

nextlevelwizard 4y ago

I think the important bit is the "last two years". Niemann has admitted cheating like 5-6 years ago.

ycombinete 4y ago
2-3 years ago* when he was 16, he is now 19.
- nextlevelwizard 4y ago
  I remember reading when he was 12 and 14
manojlds 4y ago
When he was 16 - that 3 years ago at max.

radiator 4y ago

On the contrary, I don't find it significant at all. I had not even heard of Dr. Regan. He seems to have achieved the IM Title decades ago, today he is probably simply a weak player. The best expert on opining whether Niemann has been cheating or not is the player who understands the game of chess more deeply than anyone else. He understands it from the human point of view (for example: which variations can a player of X or Y level calculate accurately, which ones might seem to work but are in practice too complicated/too risky to play, which moves are absolutely unbelievable from a human because one has to find ten super moves in a row starting from a non-forcing position) as well as from the engine's point of view, due to his experience in analysing with computers. He also has recent experience in playing Niemann in a tournament. I trust that Carlsen knows what he is doing.

Tenoke 4y ago
In a similar way that the best chess engine developer is not the best chess player there's little reason to think that the best person to detect chess engine use is the best player.
- radiator 4y ago
  Indeed there is every reason. The hardest part is to understand the game of chess. As i wrote, it includes having the entire tree of variations for every position in your mind while investigating. It is absolutely not a matter of simply comparing one-dimensional engine evaluations.
  - Tenoke 4y ago
    No, the hardest part is likely to understand statistics, have data on cheaters and non-cheaters, analyze the differences, develop and test your methods on validation data, iterate on your process etc. >includes having the entire tree of variations for every position in your mind while investigating Too bad even Magnus can't do that and the closest you can get is by writing software to do it for you.
    - radiator 4y ago
      I do not even understand what it is that you think Carlsen cannot do. But every master can do it for one position at a time. Then he just analyses a number of positions, from Niemann's games and reaches a conclusion. You did not describe the algorithm or the data which would help writing the software you are talking about. As I said, for me if this software would be based on comparing the engine's best move with the human's move and give such metrics as average centipawn loss, it would not be nearly adequate for this purpose. And I insist that all the things you described as the hardest part are only poor substitutes for understanding the game of chess.
bitcharmer 4y ago
> He seems to have achieved the IM Title decades ago, today he is probably simply a weak player. Wow. Regan has been an active and respected member of scientific community, a lecturer and book author for a long time. If anything that adds and not takes away from his credibility. He's also the most prominent expert on cheating detection that FIDE has ever worked with and he's an authority on the matter. Oh, and he's rated at around 2400 ELO. But I guess it's very easy to just slander him like that. Go back to reddit.