3 ms·

I think that's hyperbolic. Evidence doesn't have to be concrete or prove anything. It just has to convince a reasonable person that the thing being claimed may

I think that's hyperbolic. Evidence doesn't have to be concrete or prove anything. It just has to convince a reasonable person that the thing being claimed may have happened. But, I have yet to see any evidence besides Carlson's claims of cheating. I'm not even looking for "how", but I'd like to at least hear what Carlson thought was so strange in the match that it could imply cheating. Him showing up for a single play of a rematch and then quitting after the first move seems mostly like a tantrum. I'd be much not sympathetic to something like "these 4 moves we're so it of the ordinary that I can't see a way he would have taken them besides computer assistance"

Pyramus 4y ago
I think you are missing the bigger picture here. The question is not whether Niemann cheated in this specific game against Carlsen (he likely didn't) but to what extent Niemann has cheated in the past, how (online) cheaters should be treated when it comes to over-the-board chess and if the chess profession will finally take cheating seriously, i.e. introduce anti-cheating measures similar to other professional sports or gambling. As has been stated several times in this thread: Niemann has a history of (online) cheating, admitted to it, and while doing so likely lied about the extent and recency of his (online) cheating.
parineum 4y ago
> Him showing up for a single play of a rematch and then quitting after the first move seems mostly like a tantrum. I'm not a chess expert at all but, from my understanding, he is known for some unconventional play. I could see Magnus having done a calculation ahead of time of a very unconventional opening and, seeing the counter being the exact optimal choice, being convinced of cheating. All that I really know is he has a lot of credibility and the person he's accusing does not. I think it's a big story because it's dramatic no matter how it turns out.

Pyramus 4y ago

I think you are missing the bigger picture here. The question is not whether Niemann cheated in this specific game against Carlsen (he likely didn't) but to what extent Niemann has cheated in the past, how (online) cheaters should be treated when it comes to over-the-board chess and if the chess profession will finally take cheating seriously, i.e. introduce anti-cheating measures similar to other professional sports or gambling. As has been stated several times in this thread: Niemann has a history of (online) cheating, admitted to it, and while doing so likely lied about the extent and recency of his (online) cheating.

parineum 4y ago

> Him showing up for a single play of a rematch and then quitting after the first move seems mostly like a tantrum. I'm not a chess expert at all but, from my understanding, he is known for some unconventional play. I could see Magnus having done a calculation ahead of time of a very unconventional opening and, seeing the counter being the exact optimal choice, being convinced of cheating. All that I really know is he has a lot of credibility and the person he's accusing does not. I think it's a big story because it's dramatic no matter how it turns out.