Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chess’s Cheating Crisis

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 284 posts

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#61

Post by me_me_me »

bluGill wrote: post #28

> “In his games there were abnormalities, sequences that he played godlike, but there were blunders as well,” The is the secret to successful cheating: knowing where to use the engine and where to go on your own. It is easy to run engine evaluation after the fact and see if your moves always match up with the engine. However when sometimes they do an sometimes they don't it is hard to know if you just happened to stu…

Yes, but its not a strategy to win every game. It will make you play at slightly higher level.

Also there are moves that if you don't understand will look odd - computer like. That is also how suspicion can be raised.

Anecdotally i remember other cheating story.

In online FPS like Counter Strike some top level players have been caught using aim enhancer (aimbot) that move a mouse towards a target. But they had it set to only move mouse 1px. Otherwise it was too obvious, but 1px adjustment at top level is a great competitive edge.

And still people get caught. And people still cheat. Its infinite cycle.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#62

Post by dagw »

paganel wrote: post #25
3np wrote: post #12

> Sarah Longson, a former British ladies’ champion Athletic sports aside, does anyone know the motivation between gender-segregated leagues in games like chess?

> between gender-segregated leagues in games like chess? Because with few exceptions (the Polgar sisters) they didn't manage to compete on the same level as men. Judit Polgar was the highest-ranking women ever (no. 8, in 2005), but 15 years have passed already and there's no woman-challenger in sight. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judit_Polg%C3%A1r

15 years have passed already and there's no woman-challenger in sight.

I was about to comment that Yifan Hou might be close, but turns out she's only ranked in the mid 80s. And she is by all accounts the most dominant currently active woman.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#63

Post by wildmanx »

nix23 wrote: post #41
noneeeed wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a lot of online conversations recently where the default assumption is that every Olympic sprinter, every cyclist or swimmet, basically every elite athlete is doping. It's pretty sad that we are in a world where you can work incredibly hard to make the most of natural talents and many people will assume you cheated.

>basically every elite athlete is doping. Yes this! You have 3 doping levels from cheapest to really expansive: 3: Silver (the doping that is known and detectable) 2: Gold (known and probably detectable but often combined with additional substance to "wash it out" faster or hide it behind other stuff like "legal" painkillers etc) 1: Platinum (doping that is not detectable in the next 5 years "seal of proof by laborat…

Sorry, that's BS. In some sports and some top ranks, maybe there is a lot of money behind. But that's a very narrow view of "elite athlete". I personally know some Olympic finalists in some sports, and they certainly don't see big money. They struggle to actually train full-time over an Olympic cycle (4 years) without having to have some part-time job that puts food on the table and pays for gear, trips to training camps and competitions.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#64

Post by me_me_me »

cglace wrote: post #24
nurettin wrote: post #8

Chess drama is the best drama. Anyway it was sad to see armenians disqualified. They are a great team and they absolutely need not cheat. And probably did not. Not sure why petrosian kept looking down in that video, though.

He said he uses a touchpad instead of a mouse and would look down at the touchpad.

it would be more believable if he said he was reading news or watching porn on his phone.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#65

Post by LudwigNagasena »

gadders wrote: post #52
noneeeed wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a lot of online conversations recently where the default assumption is that every Olympic sprinter, every cyclist or swimmet, basically every elite athlete is doping. It's pretty sad that we are in a world where you can work incredibly hard to make the most of natural talents and many people will assume you cheated.

I guess it depends on what you make of information like this: "Of the 50 fastest men's 100m sprint times ever, only 15 have been run by an athlete NOT banned for drugs. All 15 were by Usain Bolt." https://twitter.com/sportingintel/status/1164654855329329152...

What is more important is that he improved his results during a small atypical time period.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#66

Post by 4ggr0 »

erfgh wrote: post #46
3np wrote: post #12

> Sarah Longson, a former British ladies’ champion Athletic sports aside, does anyone know the motivation between gender-segregated leagues in games like chess?

Same reason why they exist outside of chess, women are not as good as men.

I hope that's a joke, and even then, it's not a very good one.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#67

Post by throwaway744678 »

wildmanx wrote: post #58
the-dude wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This may be partially or wholly true. Athletes and the public have a different interpretation of what doping actually is. The public thinks of doping as taking performance enhancing substances. Athletes think of doping as crossing the specified threshold/limit. I have heard this interpretation on TV from a well connected Dutch cycling journalist ( Mart Smeets ). Every athlete takes performance enhancing substances.

That's depending on what you consider a "performance enhancing substance". With basic food and drinks, we surely all agree that that's not the case. But the line starts to get blurry with supplements. Whey? Creatine? Caffeine? Supplement stores are full of this stuff, and a lot is really just a waste of money and exists to milk the amateur gym bro cash cow. But some of those things help. And eventually you cross the…

Well, the line still seems blurry regarding medicines that athletes are allowed to take if they have a specific conditions... For instance, a lot of pro cyclists seem to suffer from asthma (40% vs 8% in the general population)!

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#68

Post by Pulcinella »

nix23 wrote: post #41
noneeeed wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a lot of online conversations recently where the default assumption is that every Olympic sprinter, every cyclist or swimmet, basically every elite athlete is doping. It's pretty sad that we are in a world where you can work incredibly hard to make the most of natural talents and many people will assume you cheated.

>basically every elite athlete is doping. Yes this! You have 3 doping levels from cheapest to really expansive: 3: Silver (the doping that is known and detectable) 2: Gold (known and probably detectable but often combined with additional substance to "wash it out" faster or hide it behind other stuff like "legal" painkillers etc) 1: Platinum (doping that is not detectable in the next 5 years "seal of proof by laborat…

I want to see a documentary that is basically what Icarus was going to be before it turned into being about international politics: doping by “weekend warriors” in amateur sports.

There is a lot of paranoia in the running community (for example) that even local municipal marathons are being won by amateurs doping (not to mention some people running with those Nike “Vaporfly” shoes with the carbon fiber plate in them.) I have my doubts about how effective it is at the amateur level. I suspect it’s like amateurs buying expensive golf clubs and golf balls hoping it will make them better when really they just need more practice and are skill limited rather than gear limited.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#69

Post by the-dude »

wildmanx wrote: post #58
the-dude wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This may be partially or wholly true. Athletes and the public have a different interpretation of what doping actually is. The public thinks of doping as taking performance enhancing substances. Athletes think of doping as crossing the specified threshold/limit. I have heard this interpretation on TV from a well connected Dutch cycling journalist ( Mart Smeets ). Every athlete takes performance enhancing substances.

That's depending on what you consider a "performance enhancing substance". With basic food and drinks, we surely all agree that that's not the case. But the line starts to get blurry with supplements. Whey? Creatine? Caffeine? Supplement stores are full of this stuff, and a lot is really just a waste of money and exists to milk the amateur gym bro cash cow. But some of those things help. And eventually you cross the…

Let's take hormones. Once upon a time there is an athlete who has naturally high level of certain hormone. Research is conducted and the anti-doping agency moves up the level of how much the hormone is legal to have in the blood.

Now all competitors will take additional hormones to reach, but not cross said level. As long as this works, they think of themselves as not doping and levelling the playing field. But they are taking hormones.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#70

Post by dagw »

andi999 wrote: post #36
noneeeed wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a lot of online conversations recently where the default assumption is that every Olympic sprinter, every cyclist or swimmet, basically every elite athlete is doping. It's pretty sad that we are in a world where you can work incredibly hard to make the most of natural talents and many people will assume you cheated.

Isnt that even with doping you need to work incredibly hard and make the most of you talents? (since everybody is doing this, it just raises the bar throughout, doesnt it)

work incredibly hard and make the most of you talents

Indeed, and one of the most common uses of doping is not make you stronger or perform better per se. but to let your body recover quicker so you can train longer and harder with shorter recovery time between training sessions.

Post reply on HN