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

71–80 of 284 posts

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#71

Post by nix23 »

wildmanx wrote: post #63
nix23 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 c…

>I personally know some Olympic finalists in some sports, and they certainly don't see big money

MONEY BEHIND...that's something else. And the Athletes don't pay for the Stuff, AND it's not in every sport and not every sport profits from doping.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#72

Post by dalbasal »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #16
Just1689 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I played (at a national level) people would have a laptop connected and playing in another room. They would play the enemies moves on the computer as the player and playing in the tournament would play the moves made by the computer. I remember a few people getting caught. What's funny about this is that the top players were still better than the AI running on a laptop (back then) and the cheaters occasionally g…

How could the top players be better than any chess engine? It seems like even in 2000 any off the shelf chess engine could beat any human. But I guess not... It would be neat to see the elo of the engines over time. EDIT: Heh, deep blue’s famous match happened in 1997. I guess this really is possible. It’s weird growing up with the idea that “every chess engine can beat humans every time”; I wonder when that became t…

There's a "no news" zone between a discovery and proliferation. In 1997, deep blue become superhuman.. proving the point. The average consumer engine was still like average tournament player with really weird moves. It took another decade before superhuman engines became widely available to normal people.

That decade gap is where we often mispredict the future. Once a point is proven, we expect instant impact. Reality takes time.

It took 15-20 years after superhuman chess engines were invented before they really impacted chess. Cheating is one impact, but novelty is another one. "Computer moves" are learned by GMs and played in world class tournaments. Contributing novelties is a mark of influence in chess. Even computer strategies are starting to appear in human tournaments.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#73

Post by nix23 »

orwin wrote: post #55
nix23 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 know for a fact that 3 isn't even used on national-cup event in France, at least for sailing, canoe and kayak events. Or rather, that the club and physical preparators from this club advise against anything other than supplements, and even the French Kayak champion (Joly) only take a few of those, only 1/3rd of a year.

>sailing, canoe and kayak events

How much money is behind those sports? Hint...NOT much. We Talk about Cycling, Athletics, Football and so on..

>I know for a fact that 3 isn't even used on national-cup event in France

No you don't.

BTW: I knew for a Fact that Lance Armstrong was the biggest Cycle Pro ever born and he would never need doping because he was just in another league then anyone else.

EDIT: Would you look at that:

http://sportscene.tv/paddlesports/2016/07/doping-problem-in-...

https://www.firstpost.com/sports/rio-2016-doping-scandal-hit...

But that's the Romanian Team...would never happen in France right?

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#74

Post by gadders »

Pulcinella wrote: post #68
nix23 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.…

At the tested amateur powerlifting federations, you do occasionally see people get popped after a urine test. EG:

https://www.britishpowerlifting.org/news/drug-test-results

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#75

Post by spaetzleesser »

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)

That’s the thing. Without doping you can work as hard as you want and still not beat the guys who do it. Even as amateur I have seen how much people improved their physique and performance once they started using steroids or HGH and there simply is no way to compete with that.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#76

Post by Tor3 »

the-dude wrote: post #47
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.

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.

> Every athlete takes performance enhancing substances.

No. I was one and I didn't. And I knew a lot of athletes. I know how most of them were thinking. What you said is simply not true.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#77

Post by bjourne »

I had a math exam a long while ago. One of those three hour long and the professor had me seated by myself in the math library. So I asked: - There's tons of math books here. How can you know I won't cheat? - Bjourne, do you intend to cheat? - No, of course not. - Alright. Good luck on your exam!

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#78

Post by spaetzleesser »

hnaccy wrote: post #51
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.

When the top 30 100m times all belong to athletes that have been popped for doping with the exception of Usain Bolt you have to ask yourself is he just THAT amazing or is he amazing plus have the best doping team and protection. You have enormous money and prestige on the line and lots of powerful entities (FIFA, IOC, NFL, countries, athletic wear companies, etc) that don't have a huge incentive to catch their golden…

I am almost 100% sure that Bolt is taking something. It was the same with Lance Armstrong. Pretty much all the guys he was beating got caught one after the other. It didn’t seem possible that there was one athlete who is so much better than everybody else without doping. It’s already hard enough to win with doping.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#79

Post by ha4fsd3fas »

4ggr0 wrote: post #66
erfgh wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I would imagine it's not a joke. His comment is factual if you interpret "women" and "men" as a population and in context of chess performance(not in general).

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

Re: Chess’s Cheating Crisis

#80

Post by leetcrew »

4ggr0 wrote: post #66
erfgh wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

it's true of the best chess players, and in a couple esports I know of, despite women having no innate disadvantage. doesn't stop my mom from beating me every time we play.
Post reply on HN