3 ms·

>He didn't lie, Magnus played a game like that before? Hans certainly lied by a significant amount. There was a theory that someone on Magnus' team leaked the

>He didn't lie, Magnus played a game like that before? Hans certainly lied by a significant amount. There was a theory that someone on Magnus' team leaked their prep to Hans. Something along those lines may make the comment not a lie but I await evidence. To prove an admitted cheater isn't cheating takes extra effort. >Levon blundered, mate. Clearly so. Definitely a blunder, :snirk: When playing against an engine every human eventually blunders. If you're a supergm you blunder in an unusual way. Like moving a center pawn 1 square. :snirk: >Quote from Levon about this event: "So far I am playing so badly that any points that I get are kind of a miracle" Levon who is currently in 8th place isn't doing that badly. Carlsen whose only loss is hans and he either drew or crushed everyone else...

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
roflyear 4y ago
You think... what? That a rumor leaking him prep makes him a liar? What are you talking about? > To prove an admitted cheater isn't cheating takes extra effort. What logic is this? If you commit one crime, now forever you must prove your innocence? That's dumb. It is very obvious that e6 in the game with Levon was a huge blunder. It is not remarkable that a super GM found this. If any other 2700 found this, would you take it as evidence they were cheating? > Levon who is currently in 8th place isn't doing that badly. The point is he admits he was doing poorly. And Hans is in 7th, so clearly having a better tournament. > Carlsen whose only loss is hans and he either drew or crushed everyone else... You know Hans didn't "win" that game, right? Carlsen resigned during the first move. Are you following the events at all or just parroting talking points and making shit up?
- throwaway81523 4y ago
  > What logic is this? If you commit one crime, now forever you must prove your innocence? That's dumb. You are typically not given an opportunity to prove your innocence, once you have a criminal record. If you apply for a job or apartment and fail the background check, it is usually kthxbye. This is unfortunate in many ways, but it is how the world works.
  - roflyear 4y ago
    Doesn't make it right, and that's not always true, anyway. Plenty of crimes can be expunged etc.. or aren't criminal acts. You're just twisting the argument around, go troll somewhere else.
    - throwaway81523 4y ago
      I always understood "typically" and "usually" to mean something different from "always true". They mean what they say. Whether that is good or bad, it is reality, and if you are calling for a large scale refactoring of how the world works, well, you have a big task in front of you. I can tell you that the Niemann stuff is red-hot drama in the chess world (look on r/chess, for example) and there is a range of views. One current reality of the chess world is that federations and playing sites usually won't sanction players for misconduct that is not under their jurisdiction. In Niemann's case, that meant his record of cheating on chess.com didn't stop him from playing in the Sinquefield Cup or in the current Julius Baer tournament. There are several grandmasters complaining about this. They want federations and sites to coordinate with each other, so cheating in one place gets you banned from all of them. Again, whether that's good or bad is up to you, but it's sort of like someone committing a string of crimes in one country and getting to start over in another one. That just doesn't work any more.
      - roflyear 4y ago
        It is not typical for you to have to prove your own innocence, even after committing a crime. That's silly to say.
        throwaway81523 4y ago
        > It is not typical for you to have to prove your own innocence That is what I said, I think. The question of proving your innocence usually doesn't come up. Private parties simply decide to do business with someone else instead of you, game over. Niemann is currently not under any USCF or FIDE sanctions afaik, and there are lots of open tournaments that anyone can play in as long as they are not under sanctions, so Niemann is unconditionally allowed to play in those. The Sinquefield and Baer tournaments are closed invitationals and some people are of the view that people with cheating records shouldn't receive invitations to those sorts of events. That is an intermediate view, between people saying an online cheating record shouldn't affect OTB playing opportunities, and other people saying cheating anywhere should mean getting banned everywhere. Your view on the rights and wrongs of this are up to you. I don't claim special wisdom. I can observe that other people's views are all over the place. I do know that your expectations should be formed by seeing what happens in reality, rather than by what you would prefer to see happen.
- implements 4y ago
  > What logic is this? If you commit one crime, now forever you must prove your innocence? That's dumb. [trust: noun] assured reliance on the character, ability, strength, or truth of someone. If someone demonstrates they’re untrustworthy by cheating to meet a selfish ‘want’ (success, status, attention) rather than out of desperation for a ‘need’ (feeding their family), why would you ever trust them again without evidence of some kind of personality transforming life event? Also, competition isn’t just about winning - only one person ultimately wins after all - the other players have to be able to take pleasure and meaning from just taking part, and the suspicion of cheating completely undermines that - it sullies the whole endeavour for both players and spectators.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

roflyear 4y ago

You think... what? That a rumor leaking him prep makes him a liar? What are you talking about? > To prove an admitted cheater isn't cheating takes extra effort. What logic is this? If you commit one crime, now forever you must prove your innocence? That's dumb. It is very obvious that e6 in the game with Levon was a huge blunder. It is not remarkable that a super GM found this. If any other 2700 found this, would you take it as evidence they were cheating? > Levon who is currently in 8th place isn't doing that badly. The point is he admits he was doing poorly. And Hans is in 7th, so clearly having a better tournament. > Carlsen whose only loss is hans and he either drew or crushed everyone else... You know Hans didn't "win" that game, right? Carlsen resigned during the first move. Are you following the events at all or just parroting talking points and making shit up?

throwaway81523 4y ago
> What logic is this? If you commit one crime, now forever you must prove your innocence? That's dumb. You are typically not given an opportunity to prove your innocence, once you have a criminal record. If you apply for a job or apartment and fail the background check, it is usually kthxbye. This is unfortunate in many ways, but it is how the world works.
- roflyear 4y ago
  Doesn't make it right, and that's not always true, anyway. Plenty of crimes can be expunged etc.. or aren't criminal acts. You're just twisting the argument around, go troll somewhere else.
  - throwaway81523 4y ago
    I always understood "typically" and "usually" to mean something different from "always true". They mean what they say. Whether that is good or bad, it is reality, and if you are calling for a large scale refactoring of how the world works, well, you have a big task in front of you. I can tell you that the Niemann stuff is red-hot drama in the chess world (look on r/chess, for example) and there is a range of views. One current reality of the chess world is that federations and playing sites usually won't sanction players for misconduct that is not under their jurisdiction. In Niemann's case, that meant his record of cheating on chess.com didn't stop him from playing in the Sinquefield Cup or in the current Julius Baer tournament. There are several grandmasters complaining about this. They want federations and sites to coordinate with each other, so cheating in one place gets you banned from all of them. Again, whether that's good or bad is up to you, but it's sort of like someone committing a string of crimes in one country and getting to start over in another one. That just doesn't work any more.
    - roflyear 4y ago
      It is not typical for you to have to prove your own innocence, even after committing a crime. That's silly to say.
      - throwaway81523 4y ago
        > It is not typical for you to have to prove your own innocence That is what I said, I think. The question of proving your innocence usually doesn't come up. Private parties simply decide to do business with someone else instead of you, game over. Niemann is currently not under any USCF or FIDE sanctions afaik, and there are lots of open tournaments that anyone can play in as long as they are not under sanctions, so Niemann is unconditionally allowed to play in those. The Sinquefield and Baer tournaments are closed invitationals and some people are of the view that people with cheating records shouldn't receive invitations to those sorts of events. That is an intermediate view, between people saying an online cheating record shouldn't affect OTB playing opportunities, and other people saying cheating anywhere should mean getting banned everywhere. Your view on the rights and wrongs of this are up to you. I don't claim special wisdom. I can observe that other people's views are all over the place. I do know that your expectations should be formed by seeing what happens in reality, rather than by what you would prefer to see happen.
implements 4y ago
> What logic is this? If you commit one crime, now forever you must prove your innocence? That's dumb. [trust: noun] assured reliance on the character, ability, strength, or truth of someone. If someone demonstrates they’re untrustworthy by cheating to meet a selfish ‘want’ (success, status, attention) rather than out of desperation for a ‘need’ (feeding their family), why would you ever trust them again without evidence of some kind of personality transforming life event? Also, competition isn’t just about winning - only one person ultimately wins after all - the other players have to be able to take pleasure and meaning from just taking part, and the suspicion of cheating completely undermines that - it sullies the whole endeavour for both players and spectators.