4 ms·

I believe Fabi, but the question must be asked: how does he know (with certainty!) that the player was cheating. Did the player confess? Was he blatantly lookin

I believe Fabi, but the question must be asked: how does he know (with certainty!) that the player was cheating. Did the player confess? Was he blatantly looking on his phone in front of him?

bpodgursky 4y ago
Making moves perceived to be outside his skill class I assume.
- parksoha 4y ago
  Move in a critical moment, speed of decision for said move, cheating at this level is probably extremely hard to do it alone which already creates space for leaks...
- rob74 4y ago
  If it's that, then it's pretty arrogant - I mean, that's like saying: "he's too stupid to make such a good move, so he must be cheating"? Even (relatively) bad players are bound to make good moves from time to time, either through dumb luck or through occasional sparks of inspiration, so that's hardly a reason to be 100% sure they are cheating...
  - bpodgursky 4y ago
    When you are #2 in the world at something you are allowed to be a bit arrogant about it. (down to #8 now, I suppose)
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - John23832 4y ago
    There are moves and lines that only Super GM’s will calculate. Not IMs, not FMs, not GMs. It’s not arrogant, it’s the level of play.
- jfengel 4y ago
  Not so much "outside his skill class" as "unlikely to be played by a human". Computers have a really good idea of what the optimal move is, and it's sometimes not a move any human being would play. The main way to detect cheating is to figure out that they're playing closer to the computer's line than anybody without computer assistance. In this case, his off-the-board behavior, where he seems unable to explain some of the moves he made, is also suspicious. His skill set is such that there's no move he's not capable of playing, though he should at least be able to tell you what he was thinking when he played it.
jstanley 4y ago
Maybe it was Fabi!
- alephr 4y ago
  This seems like the most obvious answer but social dynamics make it hard to suggest.
  - Bootvis 4y ago
    It's suggested here now :) More spicy would be if Kramnik was cheating in his match against Topalov.
michaelt 4y ago
Imagine I see someone after an event, flushing evidence of cheating. I am completely certain, because I saw the evidence myself. But to anyone else? There's no hard evidence - just he-said-she-said. Maybe I was mistaken - or trying to get my rival into trouble. Knowing how it would look, maybe I keep my mouth shut rather than throwing around wild, baseless allegations about cheating.

I believe Fabi, but the question must be asked: how does he know (with certainty!) that the player was cheating. Did the player confess? Was he blatantly looking on his phone in front of him?

bpodgursky 4y ago

Making moves perceived to be outside his skill class I assume.

parksoha 4y ago
Move in a critical moment, speed of decision for said move, cheating at this level is probably extremely hard to do it alone which already creates space for leaks...
rob74 4y ago
If it's that, then it's pretty arrogant - I mean, that's like saying: "he's too stupid to make such a good move, so he must be cheating"? Even (relatively) bad players are bound to make good moves from time to time, either through dumb luck or through occasional sparks of inspiration, so that's hardly a reason to be 100% sure they are cheating...
- bpodgursky 4y ago
  When you are #2 in the world at something you are allowed to be a bit arrogant about it. (down to #8 now, I suppose)
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- John23832 4y ago
  There are moves and lines that only Super GM’s will calculate. Not IMs, not FMs, not GMs. It’s not arrogant, it’s the level of play.
jfengel 4y ago
Not so much "outside his skill class" as "unlikely to be played by a human". Computers have a really good idea of what the optimal move is, and it's sometimes not a move any human being would play. The main way to detect cheating is to figure out that they're playing closer to the computer's line than anybody without computer assistance. In this case, his off-the-board behavior, where he seems unable to explain some of the moves he made, is also suspicious. His skill set is such that there's no move he's not capable of playing, though he should at least be able to tell you what he was thinking when he played it.

jstanley 4y ago

Maybe it was Fabi!

alephr 4y ago
This seems like the most obvious answer but social dynamics make it hard to suggest.
- Bootvis 4y ago
  It's suggested here now :) More spicy would be if Kramnik was cheating in his match against Topalov.

michaelt 4y ago

Imagine I see someone after an event, flushing evidence of cheating. I am completely certain, because I saw the evidence myself. But to anyone else? There's no hard evidence - just he-said-she-said. Maybe I was mistaken - or trying to get my rival into trouble. Knowing how it would look, maybe I keep my mouth shut rather than throwing around wild, baseless allegations about cheating.