4 ms·
Because I have seen these claims you are referring to and they were refuted by a more full analysis. This is a carefully doctored result that took only a slice
by Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
Because I have seen these claims you are referring to and they were refuted by a more full analysis. This is a carefully doctored result that took only a slice of data 2019-2020, and if you look at a bigger picture, which is actually in a reply to a tweet linked in the post you are referring to, irregularities even out:
https://twitter.com/NikolaosNtirlis/status/1568849221448781825?s=20&t=WcWdcsfr2iY-w4CANDZJYw https://twitter.com/NikolaosNtirlis/status/15688492214487818...
> You're clearly very invested in this case
Well, I'm probably into it because I don't believe in presumption of guilt over vague allegations. Also, someone is _wrong_ on the internet, you know.
What is happening is nothing but bullying, Magnus is using his popularity and fanbase to destroy am opponent and his fans are like a mob on a witch hunt who are out for blood, demanding severe punishment. I believe it is unfair and an aberration of sports conduct and my ideas of justice. Just crank up anti-cheating measures to 11 at the next OTB event, and see how Hans will play.
- jsnell 4y agoThat's not a "more full analysis". It's a) not a statistical analysis, b) not "more full" as it's covering a totally different time period rather than being a superset, c) I don't really understand why the "Tournaments" and "no live games" section have totally different columns. (Oh, haha, 2 out of the 3 tournaments under "no live games" from that tweet are in the small set that the chess.com report says merit investigation.)