>Assume for a moment Hans did not cheat (aside from the times he admitted to cheating). as far as i can tell he's hasn't cheated since 2020. Ive seen several o

>Assume for a moment Hans did not cheat (aside from the times he admitted to cheating). as far as i can tell he's hasn't cheated since 2020. Ive seen several of his games though where he certainly has cheated. >In the scenario where he did not cheat - how amazing is his performance? I.e. beating Magnus, Elo rating, etc. I know chess.com did an analysis, which I've read, but I'm hoping someone more impartial could explain it. Magnus ultimately drew the match; the one he lost he resigned on move 2. So no remarkable performance. >In the scenario where he did not cheat, is he really on a Bobby Fischer-like ascendance? The chess.com allegations has him better than bobby fischer in terms of rise. Though I would say that's not accounting for elo inflation. >This is what I'm trying to understand - both scenarios seem so wild to me. Either (a) this guy is cheating a pro-level chess (totally wild) OR (b) he's on a crazy ramp-up of skill (totally wild). He's an admitted cheater; but what seems to have gone unsaid is that perhaps his cheating isn't actual cheating. Rather he was reading his stream comments and viewers were cheating for him. It's not quite the same. Flipside, streaming is always going to take some of your focus and attention. Streamers are by default not going to be able to compete at the top most level. So the probability he's at a supergm level is basically impossible.