OT: Magnus Carlsen brouhahas

[DaPessimist]

It's looking more and more like this guy is probably a cheat. Still not sure how he's cheating in live matches though.


As far as the Chess.com report, it seems legit, but let's not look past the fact they just paid Magnusson $80+ million for his app. Chess.com has a financial reason to support Carlson on his claims.

[DCasey91]

Hans is more than likely a 2500 average GM lvl player that has been cheating for a long while.

The play patterns/correlations and standard devs all point too massive inconsistencies. It basically shows from 2300 onwards at one moment he’s 2500 level the next he’s playing like a super GM which no one can possibly do as basically the database shows every chess player at the top showing ultra consistent patterns because duh otherwise you’d get crushed if you’re playing against someone far superior etc.

So he’s either a smurf or a cheat and I bet the second one. He’s young so a 2300-2500 jump falls in the normalised range not one day he woke up playing at 2300 and the very next day boom he’s 2700. Some data guys have already done the acpl/sdcpl which are both strongly correlated to a players level and it’s all over the place for Han’s.

It’s big news because the data and saved games are there and can never be changed so everyone has access to his history. Could possibly be 100 games where he’s cheated on not just this incident that’s come about.

[shangrila]

Not everyone here subscribes to the WSJ, so perhaps you guys could share something about what they reported?

12ft ladder my dude.

Google it and thank me later.

[Cubbies2120]

Not everyone here subscribes to the WSJ, so perhaps you guys could share something about what they reported?

12ft ladder my dude.

Google it and thank me later.

Amazing. Thanks!

[Lou84]

It's looking more and more like this guy is probably a cheat. Still not sure how he's cheating in live matches though.


As far as the Chess.com report, it seems legit, but let's not look past the fact they just paid Magnusson $80+ million for his app. Chess.com has a financial reason to support Carlson on his claims.

Cheating at GM level is easy. They just need a hint in 1-2 crucial moments of the game that it's time to analyse the current position deeper because they have an advantage, that's it. These players are that good, it's enough to beat a world champion.

As for the "how", I think Fabiano told a story of a GM he is 100% sure he cheated. His coach changed the position from where he watched the game several times during a match. Like he was standing in the corner and the GM knew he has to look at the bishop, than he was standing in the middle and it was a sign to move another piece etc.
There was another incident of a guy that had a device in his ears a few years ago and he was catched. Certainly such a device would be way smaller today. Fabiano said that in Saint Louis the security measures were improved after Magnus left. He talked to experts in the field about it afterwards who told him that the scanners they used were simply garbage from eBay. They could detect a gun but no cheating device.
Anal beads (lol) are a possibility but I guess I would prefer an ear piece, but you never know...

As for chess.com and it's connection to Magnus, they publish the report only because Hans named chess.com on his own saying he does not understand why he gets banned. All that while attacking the elite of chess ("all GM's are idiots") and saying he only cheated 1-2 times while he was 12 and 16 years old. That was certainly not true. In the end chess.com has to defend its integrity. That's also the reason they did not publish the names of the other 3 top 100 GMs that were banned because if cheating. They accepted their bann and didn't attack chess.com directly. Chess.com also said that Magnus nor any other GM has seen a list of cheaters. There was a rumour swirling around that he had access to their database.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using RealGM mobile app

[Black star]

The wildest part about all of this is finding out that Chess.com was trying to quietly pull Hans out of their big tournament and forfeit his account without a big deal being made about it. Hans proceeds to literally call them out in front of the entire chess community in a live interview, not only forcing Chess.com's hand to publicly release a report validating their decision to ban him, but also proceeding to lie about his cheating when he knows they have evidence of his record.

Now Hans rightfully looks like both a liar and rampant cheater. Hans managed to blunder away his credibility for absolutely no reason. If this report never came out and Chess.com didn't get involved in the cheating allegations the entire situation looks much differently. An incredible unforced error on his part.

[bisme37]

Now that the season is starting I've been moving some of the OT threads off the GB, but this one is getting a lot of traffic and there's really no other forum where it belongs. So I guess it stays here.

Also...

[Duke4life831]

The wildest part about all of this is finding out that Chess.com was trying to quietly pull Hans out of their big tournament and forfeit his account without a big deal being made about it. Hans proceeds to literally call them out in front of the entire chess community in a live interview, not only forcing Chess.com's hand to publicly release a report validating their decision to ban him, but also proceeding to lie about his cheating when he knows they have evidence of his record.

Now Hans rightfully looks like both a liar and rampant cheater. Hans managed to blunder away his credibility for absolutely no reason. If this report never came out and Chess.com didn't get involved in the cheating allegations the entire situation looks much differently. An incredible unforced error on his part.

You would think being such an elite chess player, he shouldve been able to see a few moves ahead and predicted this wouldve been the outcome...

[ReasonablySober]

Read on Twitter

I respect the troll.

Read on Twitter

"Hey make sure you scan his ass."

[Dr Aki]

Read on Twitter

I respect the troll.

Read on Twitter

"Hey make sure you scan his ass."

Watch on YouTube

[ReasonablySober]

We're gonna watch a Netflix true crime documentary about him in ten years because he killed neighborhood animals.

[Capn'O]

The wildest part about all of this is finding out that Chess.com was trying to quietly pull Hans out of their big tournament and forfeit his account without a big deal being made about it. Hans proceeds to literally call them out in front of the entire chess community in a live interview, not only forcing Chess.com's hand to publicly release a report validating their decision to ban him, but also proceeding to lie about his cheating when he knows they have evidence of his record.

Now Hans rightfully looks like both a liar and rampant cheater. Hans managed to blunder away his credibility for absolutely no reason. If this report never came out and Chess.com didn't get involved in the cheating allegations the entire situation looks much differently. An incredible unforced error on his part.

You would think being such an elite chess player, he shouldve been able to see a few moves ahead and predicted this wouldve been the outcome...

More clear evidence he's cheating.

[dockingsched]

The wildest part about all of this is finding out that Chess.com was trying to quietly pull Hans out of their big tournament and forfeit his account without a big deal being made about it. Hans proceeds to literally call them out in front of the entire chess community in a live interview, not only forcing Chess.com's hand to publicly release a report validating their decision to ban him, but also proceeding to lie about his cheating when he knows they have evidence of his record.

Now Hans rightfully looks like both a liar and rampant cheater. Hans managed to blunder away his credibility for absolutely no reason. If this report never came out and Chess.com didn't get involved in the cheating allegations the entire situation looks much differently. An incredible unforced error on his part.

For Chess.com to work so hard to keep it under wraps to protect his reputation after showing him the evidence and getting a confession, for him to turn around and lie about it and try to play the victim card, it’s the worst. Hope he gets what he deserves cause he’s getting off easy so far imo.

[Fencer reregistered]

I'm just reading the Chess.com report now. Pretty interesting.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/11IokKgTVSXdpYEzAuyViIleSZ_2wl0ag/view
https://www.chess.com/blog/CHESScom/hans-niemann-report

[Fencer reregistered]

tl;dr:

-- Niemann was caught cheating online, and indeed confessed to it, to a much greater extent than he claimed in his recent public statements. I.e., he's recently lied a lot about his past cheating.
-- chess.com offers no opinion as to whether Niemann cheated in over-the-board games. They note that it is both harder to judge cheating in over-the-board games at slow time controls, and also something about which they have developed less expertise, since it is less germane to their business.
-- chess.com disinvited Niemann from an upcoming tournament as a business decision, which it feels it's entitled to do given how often he has cheated on their site.

[shangrila]

Read on Twitter

I respect the troll.

Read on Twitter

"Hey make sure you scan his ass."

I'll a little surprised they didn't get out the gloves.

Maybe a bit disappointed too.

[W_HAMILTON]

Interestingly enough, a major (highly potential) cheating scandal in tonight's delayed live-stream involving arguably the greatest poker player of all time (Phil Ivey - who was a headliner but completely non-involved), the arguably best current high-stakes pro (Garret Aldelstein... he walked off the floor after demanding the 150 thousand back from the person he accused.. who gave it to him), and a number of mixed businessmen/women.

I will say that my stance on this exact case is that the semi-recreational woman simply made a scared/"hero" call and while completely dumb, had no business giving him the money back (this occurred about an hour later off stream) and the generally consummate professional (Garret Adelstein) will come off looking very poorly here.

This is going to be a very big story in the poker sphere, in a world where a million dollar hand was potentially in play quite literally every hand that this game was played. This is a stream that I actually mentioned earlier in the thread where phones are removed from players/staff and time-delays are implemented for the stream. The loser of the hand simply felt that it was SO off base of a call, that he had to be cheated (worth mentioning that while I disagree with him, he has been playing serious poker for ~20 years and on high-stakes live streams for nearly a decade).

Link of the stream (still ongoing right now).

Watch on YouTube

Link of the hand:

Read on Twitter

?

He was only favored to win 53% to 47% at the time, so, why the outrage? I mean, if her hand sucked so bad that the only explanation for her winning was that she cheated, and yet it was basically a toss-up as to which hand would win......

[BoatsNZones]

Interestingly enough, a major (highly potential) cheating scandal in tonight's delayed live-stream involving arguably the greatest poker player of all time (Phil Ivey - who was a headliner but completely non-involved), the arguably best current high-stakes pro (Garret Aldelstein... he walked off the floor after demanding the 150 thousand back from the person he accused.. who gave it to him), and a number of mixed businessmen/women.

I will say that my stance on this exact case is that the semi-recreational woman simply made a scared/"hero" call and while completely dumb, had no business giving him the money back (this occurred about an hour later off stream) and the generally consummate professional (Garret Adelstein) will come off looking very poorly here.

This is going to be a very big story in the poker sphere, in a world where a million dollar hand was potentially in play quite literally every hand that this game was played. This is a stream that I actually mentioned earlier in the thread where phones are removed from players/staff and time-delays are implemented for the stream. The loser of the hand simply felt that it was SO off base of a call, that he had to be cheated (worth mentioning that while I disagree with him, he has been playing serious poker for ~20 years and on high-stakes live streams for nearly a decade).

Link of the stream (still ongoing right now).

Watch on YouTube

Link of the hand:

Read on Twitter

?

He was only favored to win 53% to 47% at the time, so, why the outrage? I mean, if her hand sucked so bad that the only explanation for her winning was that she cheated, and yet it was basically a toss-up as to which hand would win......

Because he effectively has the only 2 exact cards there she could realistically call, and she is dominated by virtually every other holding in that spot. This is assuming she is thinking like a logical player though. But yeah, it's just not a rational decision.

[DonaldSanders]

He was only favored to win 53% to 47% at the time, so, why the outrage? I mean, if her hand sucked so bad that the only explanation for her winning was that she cheated, and yet it was basically a toss-up as to which hand would win......

I played poker for a living for a few years, you play against your opponent's range of hands, you don't know what they actually have. She's way behind his pushing range here, which includes both his range of good hands and bluffs. A lot of his bluffing range will include queens, kings, or aces especially on a 10 high board. You can't assume your opponent is holding low suited connectors, that makes up a small portion of his potential range.

But... there's no reason to assume she is cheating. Just looks like she got caught with her hand in the cookie jar and made a bad call.

[BoatsNZones]

He was only favored to win 53% to 47% at the time, so, why the outrage? I mean, if her hand sucked so bad that the only explanation for her winning was that she cheated, and yet it was basically a toss-up as to which hand would win......

I played poker for a living for a few years, you play against your opponent's range of hands, you don't know what they actually have. She's way behind his pushing range here, which includes both his range of good hands and bluffs. A lot of his bluffing range will include queens, kings, or aces especially on a 10 high board. You can't assume your opponent is holding low suited connectors, that makes up a small portion of his potential range.

But... there's no reason to assume she is cheating. Just looks like she got caught with her hand in the cookie jar and made a bad call.

There's a smoking gun revelation discovered tonight. Went from "oddest hand ever but nothing to conclude cheating" to a high probability of cheating imo.