OT: Magnus Carlsen brouhahas

[Lou84]

I don't have time to watch it right now but maybe interesting for you guys. From what I read it seems like there are games where Niemanns moves were 100% identical with an engine. That is indeed not just suspicious to say the least.

https://youtu.be/jfPzUgzrOcQ

Sent from my Pixel 3a using RealGM mobile app

[Wagonband]

Meh... People that don't play chess shouldn't really comment on how Magnus is a sore loser etc... He is probably the best player of all time, played thousands and thousands of games vs the best players in the world, and never accused anyone of cheating until now. He has also lost in the past and he never implied any cheating happened.

Also Nieman has a history of cheating, he was working with a coach with a history of cheating, and has had a very weird rise compared to everyone else, and at times plays impossibly complex lines without thinking about it too much while having a hard time explaining them later on. He also played some games with 100% computer accuracy which is weird to say the least.

Magnus also mentioned that he is not allowed to speak about everything he knows. Could be there's an investigation or perhaps some lawyers involved. We will not know for some time.

But as said, i really doubt Magnus is just a sore loser lol. He keeps smashing everyone and has done so for the last 10 years, while only getting better. I think his ego can handle a loss. Not only that, usually losses make him go all out and be even better. He is actually lacking motivation at this point, probably hoping that someone becomes good enough to realistically challenge him (Alireza basically), so that he is finally forced to play at 100% again. So if he thought Nieman legit beat him, he would probably happy for a new challenger. But he has reason to believe he cheated, and i'm quite sure he is right

[durden_tyler]

This is the Michael Jordan of chess so pretty much whatever he wants to do, and how he does it, he will get away with it. And really, he's the only one with a mind that can spot a "cheater" in chess a mile away because his mind works like a chess engine. So go Magnus, expose the cheater, or at least troll him for the rest of his career because of his history of cheating.

[art_tatum]

If anyone ACTUALLY follows chess they would know magnus is extremely egotistical and a douche in private. So it doesn't surprise me these are his action with zero proof or even circumstantial evidence.

People act like Hans rise in ratings has never happened before, no it has many times.

And people keep parroting that he couldn't explain his moves without watching the post game interview. He does, maybe not to everyone's liking but he gives you what he was thinking. The dude like Wesley so is on the spectrum. It was vs another player where he said it was just intuition for a couple moves. And that's just another way of saying he played positionally.

Sure he cheated when he was 12 and 16 in some online casual games-at 16. But so have others, GMs, who weren't caught. Over the board is a whole different level.

If magnus' only proof is that Hans wasn't concentrating hard enough. Lol.
That to ruin the career, reputation, and mental health of a 19 yr old.

[KrAzY3]

Sure he cheated when he was 12 and 16 in some online casual games-at 16. But so have others, GMs, who weren't caught..

In other words sure he's a cheater but others were, probably.

Oh ok, everything is fine then. He's probably not the only cheater, got it.

[Lou84]

If anyone ACTUALLY follows chess they would know magnus is extremely egotistical and a douche in private. So it doesn't surprise me these are his action with zero proof or even circumstantial evidence.

People act like Hans rise in ratings has never happened before, no it has many times.

And people keep parroting that he couldn't explain his moves without watching the post game interview. He does, maybe not to everyone's liking but he gives you what he was thinking. The dude like Wesley so is on the spectrum. It was vs another player where he said it was just intuition for a couple moves. And that's just another way of saying he played positionally.

Sure he cheated when he was 12 and 16 in some online casual games-at 16. But so have others, GMs, who weren't caught. Over the board is a whole different level.

If magnus' only proof is that Hans wasn't concentrating hard enough. Lol.
That to ruin the career, reputation, and mental health of a 19 yr old.

It is not just the one game against Magnus where he sounds like an idiot afterwards, dude has a history of not being able to explain his moves. There are plenty of anecdotes like this about him.

Anyway, just watched the video I shared earlier. He had many games with 100% engine correlation, e.g. Fischer or Magnus where at +70% correlation at their absolute best. We are talking about the ultimate prodigies at what they do. There was just one player with a very high correlation of 98% and he was convicted of cheating in the end. What strikes me the most is that Niemann had a game with 45! moves with 100% engine correlation. That is way beyond a theoretical preparation until move ~20 that the super GMs can do. That is ridiculous!

Sent from my Pixel 3a using RealGM mobile app

[WarriorGM]

Sure he cheated when he was 12 and 16 in some online casual games-at 16. But so have others, GMs, who weren't caught. Over the board is a whole different level.

If magnus' only proof is that Hans wasn't concentrating hard enough. Lol.
That to ruin the career, reputation, and mental health of a 19 yr old.

I might cut a kid 10 and under some slack but a 12 year old should already know right from wrong. In the 1800s a 13 year old was already considered an adult. Those times he cheated when he was younger, was he caught or did he volunteer the information? If he was caught then those instances are technically times when he was caught cheating and less likely to be the only times he was actually cheating. No sympathy for someone who would cheat who has shown no remorse or needed prompting. That isn't some "dumb" thing a kid does. It isn't ignorance or carelessness or impulsiveness. It shows selfishness and a contempt for others that was planned.

As the great bard wrote: “Reputation, reputation, reputation! Oh, I have lost my reputation! I have lost the immortal part of myself, and what remains is bestial.”

Niemann made himself vulnerable to the charge. He lost his reputation even before Carlsen's indirect accusation.

[Gus McCrae]

I found this funny.

Ben Finegold Ⓥ
@ben_finegold
Breaking News! Magnus spoke to his chess team before Sinq Cup and told them Hans might be a cheater. He asked them what the absolute worst possible way to handle it would be. They told him to lose to Hans, then withdraw, then next time you play Hans, play one move and resign.

[Capn'O]

Only one possible solution. Rematch in the nude.

I found this funny.

Ben Finegold Ⓥ
@ben_finegold
Breaking News! Magnus spoke to his chess team before Sinq Cup and told them Hans might be a cheater. He asked them what the absolute worst possible way to handle it would be. They told him to lose to Hans, then withdraw, then next time you play Hans, play one move and resign.

I dunno. The scandal has brought a lot of attention to chess. Who the hell pays attention to chess prior to this?

[Lou84]

Only one possible solution. Rematch in the nude.

I found this funny.

Ben Finegold Ⓥ
@ben_finegold
Breaking News! Magnus spoke to his chess team before Sinq Cup and told them Hans might be a cheater. He asked them what the absolute worst possible way to handle it would be. They told him to lose to Hans, then withdraw, then next time you play Hans, play one move and resign.

I dunno. The scandal has brought a lot of attention to chess. Who the hell pays attention to chess prior to this?

You might underestimate chess a little bit, it's played and followed by millions of chess players world wide on a daily basis. It is very very popular. Just not in the mainstream media.

https://youtu.be/qjtbXxA8Fcc

Video by Nakamura. He looked at his absolute best games ever in his career and was two times above 80% correlation with engines. Also he was looking at Fabiano Caruanas legendary run in 2014 where he slapped the top players left and right in a tournament and he had like 87% engine correlation in a game. We are talking about absolute peak chess in the history of the game here. Not just some random games.

Alureza Firouzja, who has the same age as Niemann, and is the only player Magnus would like to play in a world championship match had 1! 100% game (although a short game) and 1! game around 90%....ever.

Niemann on the other hand had in the last three years 10! 100% games and 23! (Lol)over 90% games. I think the picture of why Magnus is a "sore loser" in this case gets clearer by the day.








Sent from my Pixel 3a using RealGM mobile app

[dooki667]

Only one possible solution. Rematch in the nude.

I found this funny.

Ben Finegold Ⓥ
@ben_finegold
Breaking News! Magnus spoke to his chess team before Sinq Cup and told them Hans might be a cheater. He asked them what the absolute worst possible way to handle it would be. They told him to lose to Hans, then withdraw, then next time you play Hans, play one move and resign.

I dunno. The scandal has brought a lot of attention to chess. Who the hell pays attention to chess prior to this?

You might underestimate chess a little bit, it's played and followed by millions of chess players world wide on a daily basis. It is very very popular. Just not in the mainstream media.

https://youtu.be/qjtbXxA8Fcc

Video by Nakamura. He looked at his absolute best games ever in his career and was two times above 80% correlation with engines. Also he was looking at Fabiano Caruanas legendary run in 2014 where he slapped the top players left and right in a tournament and he had like 87%

Alureza Firouzja, who has the same age as Niemann, and is the only player Magnus would like to play in a world championship match had 1! 100% game (although a short game) and 1! game around 90%....ever.

Niemann on the other hand had in the last three years 10! 100% games and 23! (Lol)over 90% games. I think the picture of why Magnus is a "sore loser" in this case gets clearer by the day.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using RealGM mobile app

Oh ****! those numbers are verified true? that seems statistically very significant to me but my knowledge on chess is very limited.

[dooki667]

Can someone with more knowledge help me understand the difference in the numbers above my post and these?Given how well the 25-year-old Norwegian is playing, that's no surprise.

Carlsen in the past year has played with an unmatched Computer Aggregated Precision Score of 98.54, a new measure from Chess.com that analyzes moves with computers. His scores over the past five years (98.38) and as an adult (98.32) have also not been matched.

Historical greats Gerry Kasparov and Bobby Fischer score 97.51 and 97.59, respectively.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/magnus-carlsen-better-than-anyone-in-history-2016-11%3famp

[dooki667]

If anyone ACTUALLY follows chess they would know magnus is extremely egotistical and a douche in private. So it doesn't surprise me these are his action with zero proof or even circumstantial evidence.

People act like Hans rise in ratings has never happened before, no it has many times.

And people keep parroting that he couldn't explain his moves without watching the post game interview. He does, maybe not to everyone's liking but he gives you what he was thinking. The dude like Wesley so is on the spectrum. It was vs another player where he said it was just intuition for a couple moves. And that's just another way of saying he played positionally.

Sure he cheated when he was 12 and 16 in some online casual games-at 16. But so have others, GMs, who weren't caught. Over the board is a whole different level.

If magnus' only proof is that Hans wasn't concentrating hard enough. Lol.
That to ruin the career, reputation, and mental health of a 19 yr old.

It is not just the one game against Magnus where he sounds like an idiot afterwards, dude has a history of not being able to explain his moves. There are plenty of anecdotes like this about him.

Anyway, just watched the video I shared earlier. He had many games with 100% engine correlation, e.g. Fischer or Magnus where at +70% correlation at their absolute best. We are talking about the ultimate prodigies at what they do. There was just one player with a very high correlation of 98% and he was convicted of cheating in the end. What strikes me the most is that Niemann had a game with 45! moves with 100% engine correlation. That is way beyond a theoretical preparation until move ~20 that the super GMs can do. That is ridiculous!

Sent from my Pixel 3a using RealGM mobile app

We may need to slow down on this a bit. In the video you can see for at least one game being checked there was over 25 engines. what this means is every move Hans made matched the top (1,2,3,5,-10 we don't know her setting) from one of the 25+ engines. that's a lot of options and we don't know are setting the same for all games. Another person ran the first game from her list and got this.https://im.ge/i/12.16d5CX
Hans 70% correlation vs Cornette 83% correlation. which is a huge difference. I'm outa my depth so idk one way or the other but we may need to slow down on this being foolproof. ps the feature she used actually disclaims this is not a method of cheat detection.

[CobraCommander]

In my view Steinitz is the original true chess genius/master that would dominate in any era given the foundations that he helped build, Fischer was the ultimate prodigy who peaked highest, and Magnus is the King of the computer age. Kasparov arguably the best career.

In basketball terms in this dynamic Steinitz is Russell/Chamberlain, Kasparov is Kareem, Fischer is Jordan (if he never came back for the 2nd 3 peat) and Magnus is Lebron.

I think everyone would agree with what you said-

When debating Magnus and Fischer- I only say Fischer because at his peak he was creating lines and toying with high level competition in a way that would have people accusing him of BEING a computer. Magnus is probably the best we have ever seen but if Bobby was playing today, with the amount of games he could play with people online and with computers I suspect he would have leveled up beyond Where he even was. Bobby was so far ahead of his peers that it’s insane. Imagine if he could spend all day on chess.com working through positions like Magnus

[HanzGruber]

Only one possible solution. Rematch in the nude.

I found this funny.

Ben Finegold Ⓥ
@ben_finegold
Breaking News! Magnus spoke to his chess team before Sinq Cup and told them Hans might be a cheater. He asked them what the absolute worst possible way to handle it would be. They told him to lose to Hans, then withdraw, then next time you play Hans, play one move and resign.

I dunno. The scandal has brought a lot of attention to chess. Who the hell pays attention to chess prior to this?

hikaru had 40k viewers today on twitch playing a tournament

[DutchManDanFan]

Can someone with more knowledge help me understand the difference in the numbers above my post and these?

I don't know for sure but I think the difference can be in valuating the categorie 'how many top moves (moves that matched the engine's top choice or were equal in score to that choice)'.

To understand this I have to explain the following first. Chess engines value positions in chess. Roughly if white is a pawn up the value is +1. If black has a good position, the valuation can be 0.5. So little but not enough compensation for the pawn.

As humans we can only guess the exact valuation by knowledge of and feel for the game. Computers calculate the valuation.
The valuation changes after every move, unless the best possible move is played.
The starting position is valued as +0.2 or so.
A value of +1 or better (pawn up) is seen as a winning position for GM's.
Positions with a valuation between - and + 0.5 (minus is better for black) should end in a draw between 2 GM's in the top 20 in the world.
When Carlsen has +0.5 most opponents are in trouble. Because they can't afford the smallest mistake (with the valuation going up). That's why he's the best.

In many positions there are different moves with small differences in valuation. If the best move give +0.35, the 2nd, 3rd and 4th move can give +0.30 and so on. So a single move not being the best does not have a direct influance on the result (should still be a draw). With CAPS this is not seen as a mistake. So the best GM's score 95% or better.
If you compare every move with the best possible move, a game of 70% is extremely good.

[picc]

Meh... People that don't play chess shouldn't really comment on how Magnus is a sore loser etc... He is probably the best player of all time, played thousands and thousands of games vs the best players in the world, and never accused anyone of cheating until now. He has also lost in the past and he never implied any cheating happened.

Also Nieman has a history of cheating, he was working with a coach with a history of cheating, and has had a very weird rise compared to everyone else, and at times plays impossibly complex lines without thinking about it too much while having a hard time explaining them later on. He also played some games with 100% computer accuracy which is weird to say the least.

Magnus also mentioned that he is not allowed to speak about everything he knows. Could be there's an investigation or perhaps some lawyers involved. We will not know for some time.

But as said, i really doubt Magnus is just a sore loser lol. He keeps smashing everyone and has done so for the last 10 years, while only getting better. I think his ego can handle a loss. Not only that, usually losses make him go all out and be even better. He is actually lacking motivation at this point, probably hoping that someone becomes good enough to realistically challenge him (Alireza basically), so that he is finally forced to play at 100% again. So if he thought Nieman legit beat him, he would probably happy for a new challenger. But he has reason to believe he cheated, and i'm quite sure he is right

It's no different from the posters here that ridicule NBA players for their opinions on things they have a much greater frame of reference for than anyone on realgm.

Or posters chastising players for having opinions on NBA-related matters, despite said posters having thousands of posts on an anonymous NBA forum where they do nothing but offer their own unsolicited opinions.

[dooki667]

Can someone with more knowledge help me understand the difference in the numbers above my post and these?

I don't know for sure but I think the difference can be in valuating the categorie 'how many top moves (moves that matched the engine's top choice or were equal in score to that choice)'.

To understand this I have to explain the following first. Chess engines value positions in chess. Roughly if white is a pawn up the value is +1. If black has a good position, the valuation can be 0.5. So little but not enough compensation for the pawn.

As humans we can only guess the exact valuation by knowledge of and feel for the game. Computers calculate the valuation.
The valuation changes after every move, unless the best possible move is played.
The starting position is valued as +0.2 or so.
A value of +1 or better (pawn up) is seen as a winning position for GM's.
Positions with a valuation between - and + 0.5 (minus is better for black) should end in a draw between 2 GM's in the top 20 in the world.
When Carlsen has +0.5 most opponents are in trouble. Because they can't afford the smallest mistake (with the valuation going up). That's why he's the best.

In many positions there are different moves with small differences in valuation. If the best move give +0.35, the 2nd, 3rd and 4th move can give +0.30 and so on. So a single move not being the best does not have a direct influance on the result (should still be a draw). With CAPS this is not seen as a mistake. So the best GM's score 95% or better.
If you compare every move with the best possible move, a game of 70% is extremely good.

ahh ok so the number I had was caps and as long as your move has positive centipawn? it's accurate. it has nothing to do with engine match or correlation? ok I see why that would allow for much higher %'s ty so much friend

[Lou84]

If anyone ACTUALLY follows chess they would know magnus is extremely egotistical and a douche in private. So it doesn't surprise me these are his action with zero proof or even circumstantial evidence.

People act like Hans rise in ratings has never happened before, no it has many times.

And people keep parroting that he couldn't explain his moves without watching the post game interview. He does, maybe not to everyone's liking but he gives you what he was thinking. The dude like Wesley so is on the spectrum. It was vs another player where he said it was just intuition for a couple moves. And that's just another way of saying he played positionally.

Sure he cheated when he was 12 and 16 in some online casual games-at 16. But so have others, GMs, who weren't caught. Over the board is a whole different level.

If magnus' only proof is that Hans wasn't concentrating hard enough. Lol.
That to ruin the career, reputation, and mental health of a 19 yr old.

It is not just the one game against Magnus where he sounds like an idiot afterwards, dude has a history of not being able to explain his moves. There are plenty of anecdotes like this about him.

Anyway, just watched the video I shared earlier. He had many games with 100% engine correlation, e.g. Fischer or Magnus where at +70% correlation at their absolute best. We are talking about the ultimate prodigies at what they do. There was just one player with a very high correlation of 98% and he was convicted of cheating in the end. What strikes me the most is that Niemann had a game with 45! moves with 100% engine correlation. That is way beyond a theoretical preparation until move ~20 that the super GMs can do. That is ridiculous!

Sent from my Pixel 3a using RealGM mobile app

We may need to slow down on this a bit. In the video you can see for at least one game being checked there was over 25 engines. what this means is every move Hans made matched the top (1,2,3,5,-10 we don't know her setting) from one of the 25+ engines. that's a lot of options and we don't know are setting the same for all games. Another person ran the first game from her list and got this.https://im.ge/i/12.16d5CX
Hans 70% correlation vs Cornette 83% correlation. which is a huge difference. I'm outa my depth so idk one way or the other but we may need to slow down on this being foolproof. ps the feature she used actually disclaims this is not a method of cheat detection.

Watch the video of Nakamura. If Hans has these kind of numbers, statistically others top players should have similar numbers as well. At least sometimes, or at all. But it seems there isn't anyone. Fisher for example does not have a single 100% game, EVER! Niemann has 10 in the last 3 years and three years ago he cheated admittedly. That's the problem.

More research will be done in the next few weeks, that's for sure.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using RealGM mobile app

[MrBigShot]

Meh... People that don't play chess shouldn't really comment on how Magnus is a sore loser etc... He is probably the best player of all time, played thousands and thousands of games vs the best players in the world, and never accused anyone of cheating until now. He has also lost in the past and he never implied any cheating happened.

Also Nieman has a history of cheating, he was working with a coach with a history of cheating, and has had a very weird rise compared to everyone else, and at times plays impossibly complex lines without thinking about it too much while having a hard time explaining them later on. He also played some games with 100% computer accuracy which is weird to say the least.

Magnus also mentioned that he is not allowed to speak about everything he knows. Could be there's an investigation or perhaps some lawyers involved. We will not know for some time.

But as said, i really doubt Magnus is just a sore loser lol. He keeps smashing everyone and has done so for the last 10 years, while only getting better. I think his ego can handle a loss. Not only that, usually losses make him go all out and be even better. He is actually lacking motivation at this point, probably hoping that someone becomes good enough to realistically challenge him (Alireza basically), so that he is finally forced to play at 100% again. So if he thought Nieman legit beat him, he would probably happy for a new challenger. But he has reason to believe he cheated, and i'm quite sure he is right

It's the principle. Cheating on the board is a very serious allegation. So if he wants to make that sort of accusation he needs to have some better justification than "Hans wasn't tense enough", he needs actual evidence.

The not being allowed to speak is just him more or less asking for permission to publicly defame Hans. If something is truthful, it's not defamatory. So if Magnus had actual proof/evidence that Hans cheated over the board, he wouldn't need any permission to "speak freely"

All this amounts to is that he's upset he lost and doesn't think someone who has previously cheated should be invited to these tournaments, which is a different discussion.