5 ms·

> The person Carlsen accused of cheating has a documented and admitted history of it. So what? He was 16 yo kid who did a stupid thing playing online. How exac

> The person Carlsen accused of cheating has a documented and admitted history of it. So what? He was 16 yo kid who did a stupid thing playing online. How exactly does that relate to top-level over the board tournament with anti-cheating measures which organizers deemed sufficient to stop cheating? So far there is nothing but allegations.

joshuamorton 4y ago
He's currently 19, and there are apparently more recent cheating things per chess.com. This isn't like "he cheated long ago and has made amends", it's guy whose cheated recently, and whose coach was also banned due to a history of cheating was found to be acting and playing suspiciously well in recent otb tournaments". Maybe it's nothing, but it's not as nothing as you're making it out to be.
- Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
  16 and 19 is a far greater age difference than it would seem by numbers only. Online play and over the board play are greatly different too. In sum, we have no hard evidence, and many allegations. I'd suggest ignoring allegations until we see some more substantial evidence.
Pyramus 4y ago
> He was 16 yo kid who did a stupid thing playing online. If chess.com is to be believed this is not the case, and they have informed Niemann about it. According to them Niemann has cheated more often and more recently than he admitted, and lied about it when he made his statement. > How exactly does that relate to top-level over the board tournament with anti-cheating measures which organizers deemed sufficient Professional chess has a huge cheating problem: It is very easy to cheat, chess tournaments are under-funded, and anti-cheating measures are expensive. There are worlds between, say, chess and cycling, or chess cheating and card counting.
- Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
  chess.com has a lot of false positives in their cheating detection method, and they are in business relationship with Carlsen, so any testimony they migth give will likely be biased. I am actually very surprised to see so many people throwing away any notion of a due process and calling for immediate harsh punishment like lifetime ban.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - Pyramus 4y ago
    chess.com will put their credibility on the line to assassinate this one player? That sounds a bit conspiratorial - isn't it more likely that both Carlsen and chess.com take issue with cheating and they are in a business relationship, not because? Isn't the point that finally there is a discussion what a due process looks like?
    - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
      chess.com never had that much credibility ever, banning people left and right, and even joking about false positives. > Isn't the point that finally there is a discussion what a due process looks like? What do you mean, 'finally'? People who were appalled by Carlsen's tantrums were insisting on it from the very start. If you have an evidence of cheating, present it. If you don't, stop behaving like a spoiled child and do not bully your opponent.
      - Pyramus 4y ago
        I'm not sure I understand your argument, I find it a bit too conspiratorial, and I'm not a fan of chess.com either. > What do you mean, 'finally'? It literally took the world champion to throw a 'tantrum' to get a public discussion about cheating in chess: How should FIDE sanction (online) cheaters? What is the process? What type of evidence is required? What are the statistical methods to distinguish a super GM from a GM with engine help? What anti-cheating measures are necessary?

joshuamorton 4y ago

He's currently 19, and there are apparently more recent cheating things per chess.com. This isn't like "he cheated long ago and has made amends", it's guy whose cheated recently, and whose coach was also banned due to a history of cheating was found to be acting and playing suspiciously well in recent otb tournaments". Maybe it's nothing, but it's not as nothing as you're making it out to be.

Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
16 and 19 is a far greater age difference than it would seem by numbers only. Online play and over the board play are greatly different too. In sum, we have no hard evidence, and many allegations. I'd suggest ignoring allegations until we see some more substantial evidence.

Pyramus 4y ago

> He was 16 yo kid who did a stupid thing playing online. If chess.com is to be believed this is not the case, and they have informed Niemann about it. According to them Niemann has cheated more often and more recently than he admitted, and lied about it when he made his statement. > How exactly does that relate to top-level over the board tournament with anti-cheating measures which organizers deemed sufficient Professional chess has a huge cheating problem: It is very easy to cheat, chess tournaments are under-funded, and anti-cheating measures are expensive. There are worlds between, say, chess and cycling, or chess cheating and card counting.

Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
chess.com has a lot of false positives in their cheating detection method, and they are in business relationship with Carlsen, so any testimony they migth give will likely be biased. I am actually very surprised to see so many people throwing away any notion of a due process and calling for immediate harsh punishment like lifetime ban.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Pyramus 4y ago
  chess.com will put their credibility on the line to assassinate this one player? That sounds a bit conspiratorial - isn't it more likely that both Carlsen and chess.com take issue with cheating and they are in a business relationship, not because? Isn't the point that finally there is a discussion what a due process looks like?
  - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
    chess.com never had that much credibility ever, banning people left and right, and even joking about false positives. > Isn't the point that finally there is a discussion what a due process looks like? What do you mean, 'finally'? People who were appalled by Carlsen's tantrums were insisting on it from the very start. If you have an evidence of cheating, present it. If you don't, stop behaving like a spoiled child and do not bully your opponent.
    - Pyramus 4y ago
      I'm not sure I understand your argument, I find it a bit too conspiratorial, and I'm not a fan of chess.com either. > What do you mean, 'finally'? It literally took the world champion to throw a 'tantrum' to get a public discussion about cheating in chess: How should FIDE sanction (online) cheaters? What is the process? What type of evidence is required? What are the statistical methods to distinguish a super GM from a GM with engine help? What anti-cheating measures are necessary?