6 ms·

> Also, clever cheating devices have been found in over the board chess competitions The most convincing candidate for such a device I've seen is an Illuminati

> Also, clever cheating devices have been found in over the board chess competitions The most convincing candidate for such a device I've seen is an Illuminati Thumper Pro hidden in Hans's shoe: https://illuminati-magic.com/products/thumper https://illuminati-magic.com/products/thumper. If you watch the footage of him getting scanned before his match with Alireza (and, crucially, before Magnus announced he was dropping), there are a couple of subtle things that are consistent with this theory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIulWkTHuu0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIulWkTHuu0: 1. He swallows (seemingly nervously) at 4 seconds shortly before his left shoe is scanned. 2. As the left shoe is being scanned, there are 2 beeping noises that at least to me, sound like they are coming from the wand, but are seemingly ignored by the wander. The same beeps do not repeat when his right shoe is scanned (that is, it's not just metal parts built into the shoes themselves). Two caveats to this part: First, I've heard differing opinions on whether the thumper will trigger metal detectors. Second, it's possible (even if unlikely IMO) that those beeps are not from that wand and it's just a coincidence that another wand or object beeped - since we can't see the wand in frame. 3. At 1:17 he starts nervously fidgeting with the credit card as the RF scanner gets close to his left foot and noticeably slows down when the scanner switches from his left foot to the right foot, and appears to stop completely as soon as the scanner is moving up away from his right foot. The RF scanner, to my understanding, would only detect devices that are actively transmitting which the thumper shouldn't need to do at all if Hans were using purely to receive engine moves/hints during the but the fact that it theoretically could transmit would explain why he'd be nervous about getting scanned anyway. Of course none of these observations are proof but they sure look suspicious to me.

roflyear 4y ago
Now analyze a video of Magnus being wanded!
- Bud 4y ago
  Why? Has Magnus admitted to cheating on multiple occasions in the past? No. He has not.
  - roflyear 4y ago
    - bombcar 4y ago
      Now I’m waiting for the big reveal when it turns out Carlson has been three PC Jrs stacked on top of each other all these years.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    As a control. You want to look for evidence that such an intense level of scrutiny is too good at finding signs of ill intent.
maxbond 4y ago
It's interesting speculation, I wouldn't say I was convinced but I did see what you meant.
swyx 4y ago
is there any thinking on how many bits of information do you need to cheat, and how many can be communicated via thumper? e.g. is the bit of information "move the knight" aka theres only about 4 bits of info, or is it "move the knight to E6" which is a good deal more bits, that could be lossy/error prone. just on the surface of it, i dont see how this thing could give enough info but i suppose with a loooot of training you could improve the info transfer rate?
- kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 4y ago
  I would think a shorthand code would be employed
  - swyx 4y ago
    we're dealing with bits of info here, thats the shortest hand there is
    - kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 4y ago
      Sure, but the number of bits is what I meant
- Bud 4y ago
  Not many at all. For instance it takes a maximum of 6 bits to encode a given destination square on the board. This is probably sufficient, or very close to it.
- rococode 4y ago
  Here's a relevant quote from Magnus regarding cheating: "I would just needed to cheat one or two times during a match, and I would not even need to be given moves, just the answer on which move was way better, or here there is a possibility of winning and here you need to be more careful. That is all I would need in order to be almost invincible." Even just 1 bit - an indication to be careful - would be enough to boost the strength of a GM. An accomplice coughing in the background to let you know there's something to watch for. For a strong player - and there's no doubt that Niemann is a strong player, the question is just how strong - that's all they need to avoid making mistakes. GMs can solve insanely hard puzzles, because they know it's a puzzle and has a specific solution. Same thing with 1 bit of info. Of course, realistically they could simply use Morse code instead of "bits" and transmit two squares (just 4 Morse "letters").
walrus01 4y ago
You don't need something that transmits if you're searching for bug-like devices or any general integrated circuits with a nonlinear junction detector: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_junction_detector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_junction_detector I am very far removed from anything related to Chess, but if they want to get serious about this they should hire people who specialize in the federal-contracting adjacent field of TSCM (technical surveillance countermeasures). https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=tscm+technical+surveillance+countermeasures https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=tscm+tech... I also think that people putting a lot of focus into shoes or other clothing articles underestimate the motivation and capability of people to use the traditional "prison wallet" method of concealing things.
- gpm 4y ago
  That's a fascinating device. Wouldn't putting the electronics inside a conductive case hide them from it? Maybe it's hard to get an antenna out if you do that though?
  - Tostino 4y ago
    The wiki said that it doesn't work against shielded electronics, however who knows how accurate that actually is. I really enjoyed the anecdote about the US embassy in Moscow having diodes embedded in the cement throughout to make finding actual bugs much harder.
- deusum 4y ago
  With that nest of hair I wonder maybe he disassembles the device and puts small parts in various locations, the most detectable in the shoe or "the pocket". Someone familiar with slight of hand could comfortably scratch here and there while dropping pieces in a 'build' pocket.
  - grouchomarx 4y ago
    of all the whacky theories I've heard so far this one stands out. Don't get too swept up in it
mellosouls 4y ago
You miss the vitally important point: they weren't needed in the game in question, so we don't even get to the point where fanciful theorising is relevant. Magnus didn't play particularly well and Hans played ok. This was not an example of a superhuman intelligence passing hints to overcome Magnus at his best.
- notshift 4y ago
  > Magnus didn't play particularly well and Hans played ok. Everyone says this, but do you really know? Those statements are after-the-fact observations of engine evaluations. They don't speak to the amount of mental work that Hans would have had to put in to play optimally (or 'ok' as you say) in those positions. You might find yourself making the same remarks when looking at the post-game analysis of any top player against an engine. Everyone crumples eventually against perfect play.
  - WastingMyTime89 4y ago
    > They don't speak to the amount of mental work that Hans would have had to put in to play optimally (or 'ok' as you say) in those positions. Yes, they do. When Magnus makes poor choice - not giving himself an advantage or playing moves giving black an advantage - it makes it easier for black. That’s the whole point.
    - inimino 4y ago
      No, that is not how that works. An engine evaluation saying that a position is better for black does not mean that it is easier for a human to play that position. Easy to play and winning for an engine are orthogonal concepts. Putting your opponent in positions that are better according to the engine but only with engine-like perfect play is a strategy at the highest levels of chess. Because the move is objectively worse, it won't be played, because it's not played, your opponent won't know it, because they don't know it, you'll play it better, then you win.
  - kennyloginz 4y ago
    Yah, even to club level players, Magnus played a bad game. Hans had nowhere close to perfect play ( I think the stock fish analysis says it’s close to 70% best moves, which is equivalent to Hans rating ). As a club level player, it blows my mind how many people are siding with Magnus. : edit, typo
lupire 4y ago
Tangent: any hack magician that uses that device deserves to lose their career.
- jansan 4y ago
  As opposed to chess, magic is about lying and cheating. Everybody knows it and everybody is fine with it in magic, as you can see here in Dary's legendary ambitious card routine: https://youtu.be/w4iu5FMaR2o?t=71 https://youtu.be/w4iu5FMaR2o?t=71 Edit: At the grand finale at 7:51 he says it again: "I haven't cheated yet, but it's coming up."
  - morelisp 4y ago
    Nonetheless there's a rough ranking of "acceptable lies", and a thumper - anything with a secretly complicit audience member, really - ranks near the bottom of that.
camjohnson26 4y ago
Even better, in that video he has a pack of gum that sets off the sensor, the security guard takes it, finishes the scan, and then gives it back! Obviously not proof of cheating but how hard would it have been to hide a device in that pack of gum?
- Freeboots 4y ago
  Now I want to watch the tournament footage to see if he ever chews gum...
  - entropicdrifter 4y ago
    He chews pretty much the whole game
fbnlsr 4y ago
If chess TO are that scared of cheaters, they should just take each player measurements and provide them with their own clothing/accessories.
- xxs 4y ago
  you missed the beads in the butt story
  - Ekaros 4y ago
    Deep cavity search livestreamed before match. Or lock them in transparent cube for week before match naked... So many solutions that specially person like Carlsen should be open to.
    - thatguy0900 4y ago
      Mandatory prematch laxatives
alophawen 4y ago

roflyear 4y ago

Now analyze a video of Magnus being wanded!

Bud 4y ago
Why? Has Magnus admitted to cheating on multiple occasions in the past? No. He has not.
- roflyear 4y ago
  - bombcar 4y ago
    Now I’m waiting for the big reveal when it turns out Carlson has been three PC Jrs stacked on top of each other all these years.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  As a control. You want to look for evidence that such an intense level of scrutiny is too good at finding signs of ill intent.

maxbond 4y ago

It's interesting speculation, I wouldn't say I was convinced but I did see what you meant.

swyx 4y ago

is there any thinking on how many bits of information do you need to cheat, and how many can be communicated via thumper? e.g. is the bit of information "move the knight" aka theres only about 4 bits of info, or is it "move the knight to E6" which is a good deal more bits, that could be lossy/error prone. just on the surface of it, i dont see how this thing could give enough info but i suppose with a loooot of training you could improve the info transfer rate?

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 4y ago
I would think a shorthand code would be employed
- swyx 4y ago
  we're dealing with bits of info here, thats the shortest hand there is
  - kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 4y ago
    Sure, but the number of bits is what I meant
Bud 4y ago
Not many at all. For instance it takes a maximum of 6 bits to encode a given destination square on the board. This is probably sufficient, or very close to it.
rococode 4y ago
Here's a relevant quote from Magnus regarding cheating: "I would just needed to cheat one or two times during a match, and I would not even need to be given moves, just the answer on which move was way better, or here there is a possibility of winning and here you need to be more careful. That is all I would need in order to be almost invincible." Even just 1 bit - an indication to be careful - would be enough to boost the strength of a GM. An accomplice coughing in the background to let you know there's something to watch for. For a strong player - and there's no doubt that Niemann is a strong player, the question is just how strong - that's all they need to avoid making mistakes. GMs can solve insanely hard puzzles, because they know it's a puzzle and has a specific solution. Same thing with 1 bit of info. Of course, realistically they could simply use Morse code instead of "bits" and transmit two squares (just 4 Morse "letters").

walrus01 4y ago

You don't need something that transmits if you're searching for bug-like devices or any general integrated circuits with a nonlinear junction detector: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_junction_detector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_junction_detector I am very far removed from anything related to Chess, but if they want to get serious about this they should hire people who specialize in the federal-contracting adjacent field of TSCM (technical surveillance countermeasures). https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=tscm+technical+surveillance+countermeasures https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=tscm+tech... I also think that people putting a lot of focus into shoes or other clothing articles underestimate the motivation and capability of people to use the traditional "prison wallet" method of concealing things.

gpm 4y ago
That's a fascinating device. Wouldn't putting the electronics inside a conductive case hide them from it? Maybe it's hard to get an antenna out if you do that though?
- Tostino 4y ago
  The wiki said that it doesn't work against shielded electronics, however who knows how accurate that actually is. I really enjoyed the anecdote about the US embassy in Moscow having diodes embedded in the cement throughout to make finding actual bugs much harder.
deusum 4y ago
With that nest of hair I wonder maybe he disassembles the device and puts small parts in various locations, the most detectable in the shoe or "the pocket". Someone familiar with slight of hand could comfortably scratch here and there while dropping pieces in a 'build' pocket.
- grouchomarx 4y ago
  of all the whacky theories I've heard so far this one stands out. Don't get too swept up in it

mellosouls 4y ago

You miss the vitally important point: they weren't needed in the game in question, so we don't even get to the point where fanciful theorising is relevant. Magnus didn't play particularly well and Hans played ok. This was not an example of a superhuman intelligence passing hints to overcome Magnus at his best.

notshift 4y ago
> Magnus didn't play particularly well and Hans played ok. Everyone says this, but do you really know? Those statements are after-the-fact observations of engine evaluations. They don't speak to the amount of mental work that Hans would have had to put in to play optimally (or 'ok' as you say) in those positions. You might find yourself making the same remarks when looking at the post-game analysis of any top player against an engine. Everyone crumples eventually against perfect play.
- WastingMyTime89 4y ago
  > They don't speak to the amount of mental work that Hans would have had to put in to play optimally (or 'ok' as you say) in those positions. Yes, they do. When Magnus makes poor choice - not giving himself an advantage or playing moves giving black an advantage - it makes it easier for black. That’s the whole point.
  - inimino 4y ago
    No, that is not how that works. An engine evaluation saying that a position is better for black does not mean that it is easier for a human to play that position. Easy to play and winning for an engine are orthogonal concepts. Putting your opponent in positions that are better according to the engine but only with engine-like perfect play is a strategy at the highest levels of chess. Because the move is objectively worse, it won't be played, because it's not played, your opponent won't know it, because they don't know it, you'll play it better, then you win.
- kennyloginz 4y ago
  Yah, even to club level players, Magnus played a bad game. Hans had nowhere close to perfect play ( I think the stock fish analysis says it’s close to 70% best moves, which is equivalent to Hans rating ). As a club level player, it blows my mind how many people are siding with Magnus. : edit, typo

lupire 4y ago

Tangent: any hack magician that uses that device deserves to lose their career.

jansan 4y ago
As opposed to chess, magic is about lying and cheating. Everybody knows it and everybody is fine with it in magic, as you can see here in Dary's legendary ambitious card routine: https://youtu.be/w4iu5FMaR2o?t=71 https://youtu.be/w4iu5FMaR2o?t=71 Edit: At the grand finale at 7:51 he says it again: "I haven't cheated yet, but it's coming up."
- morelisp 4y ago
  Nonetheless there's a rough ranking of "acceptable lies", and a thumper - anything with a secretly complicit audience member, really - ranks near the bottom of that.

camjohnson26 4y ago

Even better, in that video he has a pack of gum that sets off the sensor, the security guard takes it, finishes the scan, and then gives it back! Obviously not proof of cheating but how hard would it have been to hide a device in that pack of gum?

Freeboots 4y ago
Now I want to watch the tournament footage to see if he ever chews gum...
- entropicdrifter 4y ago
  He chews pretty much the whole game

fbnlsr 4y ago

If chess TO are that scared of cheaters, they should just take each player measurements and provide them with their own clothing/accessories.

xxs 4y ago
you missed the beads in the butt story
- Ekaros 4y ago
  Deep cavity search livestreamed before match. Or lock them in transparent cube for week before match naked... So many solutions that specially person like Carlsen should be open to.
  - thatguy0900 4y ago
    Mandatory prematch laxatives

alophawen 4y ago