OT: Magnus Carlsen brouhahas

[WarriorGM]

All these examples posted above is examples of drug doping, in which blood is kept in storage for years on end waiting for technology to catch up.

Niemann, if he cheated, is being accused of using/having external source of information when he isn't allowed.

The closest situation I can think of is the Astros and bin banging to let their batters know what pitches are coming ahead of time.

Because it's literally in person and over-the-board, this practically means the only proof that stands up needs to be catching Niemann in the act.

If he's cheating, then you have explain how. All the "evidence" so far is that:
1. He said he's previously cheated in online play at the ages of 12 and 16 and was banned from chess.com for it.
2. He's been playing really well the last few years, well enough to beat Magnus where Magnus played like ****
3. He's had a meteoric rise as a late teenager, but not anymore meteoric than other similarly aged and experienced GMs
4. Other GMs have suspected him of cheating, but have no proof either.

Magnus' lawyer filtered statement basically means he doesn't have proof and that he say anything more unless Niemann drops his (only) resort of defending himself of a defamation suit if Magnus can't prove cheating.

At this point I think most professional chess players are probably leaning towards the belief Niemann cheated and they're not basing it just on Magnus's comments. The proof you are talking about is proof in a legal court. There is enough proof that other professional players could use to justify not playing him and if other players refuse to play him, tournaments aren't going to invite him.

[Dr Aki]

All these examples posted above is examples of drug doping, in which blood is kept in storage for years on end waiting for technology to catch up.

Niemann, if he cheated, is being accused of using/having external source of information when he isn't allowed.

The closest situation I can think of is the Astros and bin banging to let their batters know what pitches are coming ahead of time.

Because it's literally in person and over-the-board, this practically means the only proof that stands up needs to be catching Niemann in the act.

If he's cheating, then you have explain how. All the "evidence" so far is that:
1. He said he's previously cheated in online play at the ages of 12 and 16 and was banned from chess.com for it.
2. He's been playing really well the last few years, well enough to beat Magnus where Magnus played like ****
3. He's had a meteoric rise as a late teenager, but not anymore meteoric than other similarly aged and experienced GMs
4. Other GMs have suspected him of cheating, but have no proof either.

Magnus' lawyer filtered statement basically means he doesn't have proof and that he can't say anything more unless Niemann drops his (only) resort of defending himself of a defamation suit if Magnus can't prove cheating.

At this point I think most professional chess players are probably leaning towards the belief Niemann cheated and they're not basing it just on Magnus's comments. The proof you are talking about is proof in a legal court. There is enough proof that other professional players could use to justify not playing him and if other players refuse to play him, tournaments aren't going to invite him.

I imagine that's the way it'll go, but it would be completely unjustified and would pretty much amount to bullying of a 19 year old teenager based on unprovable claims.

It would reflect incredibly poorly on the chess world if they let that happen.

[WarriorGM]

All these examples posted above is examples of drug doping, in which blood is kept in storage for years on end waiting for technology to catch up.

Niemann, if he cheated, is being accused of using/having external source of information when he isn't allowed.

The closest situation I can think of is the Astros and bin banging to let their batters know what pitches are coming ahead of time.

Because it's literally in person and over-the-board, this practically means the only proof that stands up needs to be catching Niemann in the act.

If he's cheating, then you have explain how. All the "evidence" so far is that:
1. He said he's previously cheated in online play at the ages of 12 and 16 and was banned from chess.com for it.
2. He's been playing really well the last few years, well enough to beat Magnus where Magnus played like ****
3. He's had a meteoric rise as a late teenager, but not anymore meteoric than other similarly aged and experienced GMs
4. Other GMs have suspected him of cheating, but have no proof either.

Magnus' lawyer filtered statement basically means he doesn't have proof and that he can't say anything more unless Niemann drops his (only) resort of defending himself of a defamation suit if Magnus can't prove cheating.

At this point I think most professional chess players are probably leaning towards the belief Niemann cheated and they're not basing it just on Magnus's comments. The proof you are talking about is proof in a legal court. There is enough proof that other professional players could use to justify not playing him and if other players refuse to play him, tournaments aren't going to invite him.

I imagine that's the way it'll go, but it would be completely unjustified and would pretty much amount to bullying of a 19 year old teenager based on unprovable claims.

It would reflect incredibly poorly on the chess world of they let that happen.

I don't think you play chess seriously. Good chess players can suss out a fake probably as well as art experts can suss out a forgery. If you are coming at it as a layman you're not going to easily understand but among experts it is easily understood.

There are many clues that do not involve just analyzing games. If you look at the greatest players, most of them are prodigies from a young age. Prodigies show their aptitude in the game in various ways and have some common traits that non-prodigies don't. For example extremely fast calculation abilities. That's why the strongest players are pretty much always the best players at fast chess where there is almost instantaneous moves required and where even looking at a computer screen to see what the computer plays might lose you the game on time. Niemann's relative lack of success at rapid chess which isn't even among the faster forms of chess has been brought up as another suspicious aspect.

There wasn't any direct proof in Lance Armstrong's case for years and years. Until there was.

He was able to dupe the system despite numerous reports showing his performance levels are impossible to achieve w/o blood doping.
People who spoke up were ridiculed or destroyed by his propaganda machine.

We all know the rest of the story.

Wouldn't Magnus be the Lance in this scenario though given his dominance over the field?

Chess is different from cycling. Magnus was showing signs of his future greatness at a very young age. He was already projected to be one of the strongest players in the world. Mentored for a time by a former world champion. Became champion at a time when it was still pretty easy to tell if moves were by a computer.

[art_tatum]

Magnus is a turd. He is essentially ending this guys career by saying he won't play against Hans. No top tourney will now invite Hans. To play.

All on a maybe he cheated. Even though every other player during the tourney has come out and said they didn't think hans cheated.

Even though magnus played like a 43% computer move which is extremely low against hans.

What evidence? Bc hans cheated at age 12? And in random online games at age 16? Even though he served his ban and grinder back to the top?
Should we not give kids 2nd chances?

And magnus Still has no evidence or even any idea how hans cheated

[art_tatum]

All these examples posted above is examples of drug doping, in which blood is kept in storage for years on end waiting for technology to catch up.

Niemann, if he cheated, is being accused of using/having external source of information when he isn't allowed.

The closest situation I can think of is the Astros and bin banging to let their batters know what pitches are coming ahead of time.

Because it's literally in person and over-the-board, this practically means the only proof that stands up needs to be catching Niemann in the act.

If he's cheating, then you have explain how. All the "evidence" so far is that:
1. He said he's previously cheated in online play at the ages of 12 and 16 and was banned from chess.com for it.
2. He's been playing really well the last few years, well enough to beat Magnus where Magnus played like ****
3. He's had a meteoric rise as a late teenager, but not anymore meteoric than other similarly aged and experienced GMs
4. Other GMs have suspected him of cheating, but have no proof either.

Magnus' lawyer filtered statement basically means he doesn't have proof and that he say anything more unless Niemann drops his (only) resort of defending himself of a defamation suit if Magnus can't prove cheating.

At this point I think most professional chess players are probably leaning towards the belief Niemann cheated and they're not basing it just on Magnus's comments. The proof you are talking about is proof in a legal court. There is enough proof that other professional players could use to justify not playing him and if other players refuse to play him, tournaments aren't going to invite him.

Except other players in the tourney said that they didn't think he cheated during it.

[WarriorGM]

All these examples posted above is examples of drug doping, in which blood is kept in storage for years on end waiting for technology to catch up.

Niemann, if he cheated, is being accused of using/having external source of information when he isn't allowed.

The closest situation I can think of is the Astros and bin banging to let their batters know what pitches are coming ahead of time.

Because it's literally in person and over-the-board, this practically means the only proof that stands up needs to be catching Niemann in the act.

If he's cheating, then you have explain how. All the "evidence" so far is that:
1. He said he's previously cheated in online play at the ages of 12 and 16 and was banned from chess.com for it.
2. He's been playing really well the last few years, well enough to beat Magnus where Magnus played like ****
3. He's had a meteoric rise as a late teenager, but not anymore meteoric than other similarly aged and experienced GMs
4. Other GMs have suspected him of cheating, but have no proof either.

Magnus' lawyer filtered statement basically means he doesn't have proof and that he say anything more unless Niemann drops his (only) resort of defending himself of a defamation suit if Magnus can't prove cheating.

At this point I think most professional chess players are probably leaning towards the belief Niemann cheated and they're not basing it just on Magnus's comments. The proof you are talking about is proof in a legal court. There is enough proof that other professional players could use to justify not playing him and if other players refuse to play him, tournaments aren't going to invite him.

Except other players in the tourney said that they didn't think he cheated during it.

Was Niemann cheating in that game particularly? There is a good chance he wasn't. In that Carlsen may be overreacting. But has Niemann never cheated in competitive play like Niemann claims? Doubtful from what has come out since.

[WarriorGM]

Magnus is a turd. He is essentially ending this guys career by saying he won't play against Hans. No top tourney will now invite Hans. To play.

All on a maybe he cheated. Even though every other player during the tourney has come out and said they didn't think hans cheated.

Even though magnus played like a 43% computer move which is extremely low against hans.

What evidence? Bc hans cheated at age 12? And in random online games at age 16? Even though he served his ban and grinder back to the top?
Should we not give kids 2nd chances?

And magnus Still has no evidence or even any idea how hans cheated

Let's be clear here. There is only one person who is a proven turd: Niemann. He has admitted to cheating before. He was 12? 16? Doesn't matter, he was a turd for doing so.

Magnus's actions may be questionable but it's to defend the integrity of the game and it is as yet not proven that he is wrong.

Can you explain why Niemann needs to be given a second chance? The circumstances around chess are what they are. If it was easy to find cheats I'd say go ahead give him a second chance. Since it isn't, there is no particular reason why the chess world needs to be lenient. People will adjust to the situation.

If other players were to say simply that on principle they don't want to play with someone who has cheated in the past, why shouldn't they be able to do that?

[Fencer reregistered]

Looking at one of his bios, Niemann does seem to be pretty good at speed chess -- blitz and even Double Bughouse.

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessplayer?pid=152611

I'd add that the Carlsen game and another recent eyebrow-raiser have some elements in common strategically, namely a lot of space-gaining pawn pushing without the clean pawn structure one normally expects with such tactics.

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=2267264

[SalmonsSuperfan]

All these examples posted above is examples of drug doping, in which blood is kept in storage for years on end waiting for technology to catch up.

Niemann, if he cheated, is being accused of using/having external source of information when he isn't allowed.

The closest situation I can think of is the Astros and bin banging to let their batters know what pitches are coming ahead of time.

Because it's literally in person and over-the-board, this practically means the only proof that stands up needs to be catching Niemann in the act.

If he's cheating, then you have explain how. All the "evidence" so far is that:
1. He said he's previously cheated in online play at the ages of 12 and 16 and was banned from chess.com for it.
2. He's been playing really well the last few years, well enough to beat Magnus where Magnus played like ****
3. He's had a meteoric rise as a late teenager, but not anymore meteoric than other similarly aged and experienced GMs
4. Other GMs have suspected him of cheating, but have no proof either.

Magnus' lawyer filtered statement basically means he doesn't have proof and that he say anything more unless Niemann drops his (only) resort of defending himself of a defamation suit if Magnus can't prove cheating.

At this point I think most professional chess players are probably leaning towards the belief Niemann cheated and they're not basing it just on Magnus's comments. The proof you are talking about is proof in a legal court. There is enough proof that other professional players could use to justify not playing him and if other players refuse to play him, tournaments aren't going to invite him.

no they aren't. the only chess guys who are desperate enough to make twitch money and thus make public comments say there's no proof.

and it's true, there's literally no proof beyond this guy's biased intuition. there's some other people who replied to my comment saying as much, they just trust magnus's intuition cuz he's the GOAT, which he is and is incredibly impressive for a game that has been essentially the same for centuries. to make a bball analogy, if lebron happened to accuse some random all-star of juicing, let's say donovan mitchell, and the league said he wasn't and his fellow professional comments ranged from 'i don't know' to 'it's possible, but there's no proof', what would we say?

you can google the match and look at the game's moves and how much time it took to make a move and there's nothing suspicious except it's a rare line Magnus played and Niemann was evidently prepared for it. An autistic guy cheating at online chess in random online matches when he was 16 is not evidence that he cheats in professional over the board chess. it's obviously vastly more difficult to cheat in that situation which is why the "anal beads telling him morse code" seems to be the jocular, yet popular, thinking.

magnus is acting like an idiot about this. he just got smoked by someone who is not nearly as good as him. **** happens, man. mj had some **** shooting nights and lost some big games. magnus lost his game at an important tournament that he claims not to care about because he's already the five time world champion (unprecedented, think 3peat bulls) and doesn't want to defend his title. well, non-champions are trying to beat the best and taking it more seriously. nba is a relevant comparison in some ways because comparing magnus carlsen to a typical 'grandmaster' is like comparing a mvp to a 12th man. they're all good enough to be in the league, but some are just better. doesn't mean those end of the bench guys can't show out every so often against the best competition.

[WarriorGM]

All these examples posted above is examples of drug doping, in which blood is kept in storage for years on end waiting for technology to catch up.

Niemann, if he cheated, is being accused of using/having external source of information when he isn't allowed.

The closest situation I can think of is the Astros and bin banging to let their batters know what pitches are coming ahead of time.

Because it's literally in person and over-the-board, this practically means the only proof that stands up needs to be catching Niemann in the act.

If he's cheating, then you have explain how. All the "evidence" so far is that:
1. He said he's previously cheated in online play at the ages of 12 and 16 and was banned from chess.com for it.
2. He's been playing really well the last few years, well enough to beat Magnus where Magnus played like ****
3. He's had a meteoric rise as a late teenager, but not anymore meteoric than other similarly aged and experienced GMs
4. Other GMs have suspected him of cheating, but have no proof either.

Magnus' lawyer filtered statement basically means he doesn't have proof and that he say anything more unless Niemann drops his (only) resort of defending himself of a defamation suit if Magnus can't prove cheating.

At this point I think most professional chess players are probably leaning towards the belief Niemann cheated and they're not basing it just on Magnus's comments. The proof you are talking about is proof in a legal court. There is enough proof that other professional players could use to justify not playing him and if other players refuse to play him, tournaments aren't going to invite him.

no they aren't. the only chess guys who are desperate enough to make twitch money and thus make public comments say there's no proof.

Did you see the games earlier in his career where Niemann played games with moves that matched engine selections 100% of the time?

There is no conclusive proof, but there is a lot of statistical improbability aside from the questions you could bring up with his unnatural behavior. That's without going into him actually cheating online before.

Can you tell us again why everyone needs to accommodate him?

[shangrila]

The fact that Hans is autistic actually makes me lean towards that he wasn't cheating.

Not because autistic people are incapable of cheating or anything but since one of the main arguments for him cheating is that Magnus played some random strat that he normally doesn't and Hans seemed too prepared for it...well, someone on the spectrum is exactly the kind of person I'd expect to be able to memorise that kind of stuff.

[Big J]

Has anyone said how they thought he would be cheating besides the **** anal beads theory?

[GreatWhiteStiff]

You gonna tell me I’ve been cheating at chess all these years and I didn’t even know it?

"It's not what you think, mom! I'm becoming a championship level chess player."

[Dr Aki]

At this point I think most professional chess players are probably leaning towards the belief Niemann cheated and they're not basing it just on Magnus's comments. The proof you are talking about is proof in a legal court. There is enough proof that other professional players could use to justify not playing him and if other players refuse to play him, tournaments aren't going to invite him.

no they aren't. the only chess guys who are desperate enough to make twitch money and thus make public comments say there's no proof.

Did you see the games earlier in his career where Niemann played games with moves that matched engine selections 100% of the time?

There is no conclusive proof, but there is a lot of statistical improbability aside from the questions you could bring up with his unnatural behavior. That's without going into him actually cheating online before.

Can you tell us again why everyone needs to accommodate him?

What does that prove? That when a GM plays 100% engine line games, it's cheating? Lots of GM have 100% engine line games. Engines have been around for a while now, great chess players now study computer lines and play them in real games. Niemann's also been playing a lot more (lower tier) 2400-2600 players across the same timespan as his rise. Easier opponents, more opponent blunders, easier time figuring out what the best moves are.

There is nothing special about accommodating Hans, I don't see how, in the absence of proof, that you even need to treat him differently other than some other players have "a feeling" he had/is cheating somehow and won't play against him. If anything, that's actually accommodating the accusers.

[WarriorGM]

no they aren't. the only chess guys who are desperate enough to make twitch money and thus make public comments say there's no proof.

Did you see the games earlier in his career where Niemann played games with moves that matched engine selections 100% of the time?

There is no conclusive proof, but there is a lot of statistical improbability aside from the questions you could bring up with his unnatural behavior. That's without going into him actually cheating online before.

Can you tell us again why everyone needs to accommodate him?

What does that prove? That when a GM plays 100% engine line games, it's cheating? Lots of GM have 100% engine line games. Engines have been around for a while now, great chess players now study computer lines and play them in real games. Niemann's also been playing a lot more (lower tier) 2400-2600 players across the same timespan as his rise. Easier opponents, more opponent blunders, easier time figuring out what the best moves are.

There is nothing special about accommodating Hans, I don't see how, in the absence of proof, that you even need to treat him differently other than some other players have "a feeling" he had/is cheating somehow and won't play against him. If anything, that's actually accommodating the accusers.

Would you care to show the numbers? How often do 100% engine line games show up?

Accommodating Hans will probably entail higher security checks all around which is an added expense for organizers. The accusers are old guys on the block who have a detailed history and faced scrutiny for years. They also have legitimate suspicions. If you don't believe their suspicions are legitimate why don't you give examples of what in your view would arouse legitimate suspicion. If it's only being caught in flagrante delicto then I don't think you're serious about the concerns raised.

I don't know if it was already known that Niemann cheated on online websites or if he volunteered that information but Carlsen's actions revealed he did. Is that something everyone does? I don't think so.

[Dr Aki]

Did you see the games earlier in his career where Niemann played games with moves that matched engine selections 100% of the time?

There is no conclusive proof, but there is a lot of statistical improbability aside from the questions you could bring up with his unnatural behavior. That's without going into him actually cheating online before.

Can you tell us again why everyone needs to accommodate him?

What does that prove? That when a GM plays 100% engine line games, it's cheating? Lots of GM have 100% engine line games. Engines have been around for a while now, great chess players now study computer lines and play them in real games. Niemann's also been playing a lot more (lower tier) 2400-2600 players across the same timespan as his rise. Easier opponents, more opponent blunders, easier time figuring out what the best moves are.

There is nothing special about accommodating Hans, I don't see how, in the absence of proof, that you even need to treat him differently other than some other players have "a feeling" he had/is cheating somehow and won't play against him. If anything, that's actually accommodating the accusers.

Would you care to show the numbers? How often do 100% engine line games show up?

Accommodating Hans will probably entail higher security checks all around which is an added expense for organizers.

One is Magnus, the other is Hans. Across the same time frame. When Hans was playing mostly 2500-2600s players.

The point is, GMs will play 100% engine lines, you play against lesser opponents, you'll have an easier time playing the best moves.

If it's higher security checks, that's accommodating his accusers, not Hans.

Hell, I wouldn't be surprised that if through all this, Hans becomes draws extra viewers to all the tournaments he'll be invited to and becomes a commercial success

[WarriorGM]

What does that prove? That when a GM plays 100% engine line games, it's cheating? Lots of GM have 100% engine line games. Engines have been around for a while now, great chess players now study computer lines and play them in real games. Niemann's also been playing a lot more (lower tier) 2400-2600 players across the same timespan as his rise. Easier opponents, more opponent blunders, easier time figuring out what the best moves are.

There is nothing special about accommodating Hans, I don't see how, in the absence of proof, that you even need to treat him differently other than some other players have "a feeling" he had/is cheating somehow and won't play against him. If anything, that's actually accommodating the accusers.

Would you care to show the numbers? How often do 100% engine line games show up?

Accommodating Hans will probably entail higher security checks all around which is an added expense for organizers.

One is Magnus, the other is Hans. The point is, GMs will play 100% engine lines, you play against lesser opponents, you'll have an easier time playing the best moves.

If it's higher security checks, that's accommodating his accusers, not Hans

A comparison between Niemann and Carlsen would not be appropriate because Carlsen is one of the greatest players of all-time whose level of play is vetted via other means. If there is anyone in the world you'd expect to have the most games similar to a computer it would be Carlsen. Niemann has until recently been an ordinary GM or worse. If they even have a similar number that would be suspicious.

[Adelheid]

starting from 2020, Magnus only has 2 games with 100 percent accuracy

Niemann has much more than that spanning from that time period

[Dr Aki]

Would you care to show the numbers? How often do 100% engine line games show up?

Accommodating Hans will probably entail higher security checks all around which is an added expense for organizers.

One is Magnus, the other is Hans. The point is, GMs will play 100% engine lines, you play against lesser opponents, you'll have an easier time playing the best moves.

If it's higher security checks, that's accommodating his accusers, not Hans

A comparison between Niemann and Carlsen would not be appropriate because Carlsen is one of the greatest players of all-time whose level of play is vetted via other means. If there is anyone in the world you'd expect to have the most games similar to a computer it would be Carlsen. Niemann has until recently been an ordinary GM or worse. If they even have a similar number that would be suspicious.

Or... get this... Niemann was actually underrated, is young and had room to grow, started taking chess more seriously, and COVID prevented him from playing OTB and increasing his rating

And when he did play, he beat a ton of 2500s and 2600s players and his rating went up to closer to where it probably should've been

[Dr Aki]

starting from 2020, Magnus only has 2 games with 100 percent accuracy

Niemann has much more than that spanning from that time period

It's cos Niemann has played like 4x as many games