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

Magnus Carlsen resigns against Hans Niemann after one move

new.chess24.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 338 posts

Re: Magnus Carlsen resigns against Hans Niemann after one move

#261

Post by Loughla »

Beltalowda wrote: post #241
KingMob wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's admitted to cheating in the past. The Bayesian priors for him currently cheating are not the same as for other people.

> He's admitted to cheating in the past. From what I can find: "he did admit that he had cheated in the past – first as a 12-year-old when a friend gave him some help in an online tournament and then as a 16-year-old playing unrated games while he was streaming." A 12-year old cheating in a tournament! We cannot ever trust this man!

For context at high levels of play.

Magnus Carlsen started playing at around age 5. Was in his first tournament at 8. Was winning and establishing a career in his teens. Was grand master in his early 20's.

So, cheating at 12 and 16 could equate to cheating now. That's only 3 or 7 years ago. Hans is 19.

Re: Magnus Carlsen resigns against Hans Niemann after one move

#262

Post by tromp »

vintermann wrote: post #246
davidguetta wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even Karpov said he played badly in the Sinquefield game. Personally I think Hans didn't cheat in this game ...... but: my best theory is that Carlsen is afraid to play against people who HAVE cheated once, because there mere thought that he COULD be cheating right now is enough to derail him from clear thinking. I think this because it's exactly what he declared in an interview ABOUT cheating on 2021. So basically h…

In Go, (and in competitive Starcraft, I've noticed) they talk about "overplay", making a move that's trying to claim too much, biting over more than you should be able to chew. And if you spot it, and are good enough, you can "punish" an overplay. If you are playing with a handicap, you have to make overplays, and hope your opponent can't punish them. As the weaker player in a handicap game you know this, but you fac…

> If you are playing with a handicap, you have to make overplays

Some players may feel they have to, but others manage to refrain from making overplays, and just keep playing moves they consider objectively best, patiently waiting for their weaker opponent to make big mistakes. Usually such patience does get rewarded.

Re: Magnus Carlsen resigns against Hans Niemann after one move

#263

Post by nextlevelwizard »

ycombinete wrote: post #94
nextlevelwizard wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the important bit is the "last two years". Niemann has admitted cheating like 5-6 years ago.

2-3 years ago* when he was 16, he is now 19.

I remember reading when he was 12 and 14

Re: Magnus Carlsen resigns against Hans Niemann after one move

#264

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

krisoft wrote: post #259
Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because whatever a person did as a child playing online on a second-rate chess site is hardly relevant for a top-level over the board tournament with strict anti-cheating measures. It is simply immoral to deny any kind of redemption to any person who has ever made a mistake. For a person so ready to cast stones, are you yourself without any sin? Should the errors you once made follow you for the rest of your life? I'…

> people should put up some evidence of Niemann's cheating, how exactly he was receiving information on best possible moves, Do you see how absolutely impossible to do this, don't you?

I believe that cheating in over the board tournaments is hardly possible with all the security measures that are now taken by event organizers. If you suspect cheating you must come up with some explanation how exactly it is happening.

Re: Magnus Carlsen resigns against Hans Niemann after one move

#265

Post by tiagod »

mach1ne wrote: post #247
EGreg wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One opening move can’t possibly confirm cheating since the opening moves played by the best chess engines are also the same moves played by the vast majority of human players.

But if there is no obviously desirable move, and instead a wide array of potential equally good moves, then picking the same as the computer picked gives a high probability of cheating. That being said, I find it unlikely that that's the case here.

I believe you're starting from a false premise.

In case of the first moves, there's definitely not a wide array of potentially equally good moves. There's a very well known set which is studied by every serious chess player.

Re: Magnus Carlsen resigns against Hans Niemann after one move

#266

Post by swores »

Ma8ee wrote: post #236
nextlevelwizard wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if you consider that the machine should act like a human player. We can definitely build machines that beat humans in both tennis and soccer every single time.

How would that soccer player look? I don’t think we can build a machine that is good at soccer.

Once you remove the requirement that it look or act like a human, there's plenty of (pointless) ways you could make robots beat humans at football. A drone could pick up the ball and fly it into the goal without breaking the rules because the rules assume that to carry the ball it would need to touch your hands or arms (which the drone doesn't have). Build another robot that's the exact size of the goal, and too heavy to move off the goal line, hey presto the other team can't score.

I think this line of thinking only makes sense if either you do require the robots to behave like humans (opposite of the comment you replied to), or by rewriting the rules of the game completely.

Re: Magnus Carlsen resigns against Hans Niemann after one move

#267

Post by kevinmchugh »

jpgvm wrote: post #134
FooHentai wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with Carlsen on this. If you're caught or admit to cheating even once in a professional competitive career that's it - You should be out for good. That we have this bizarre attitude of permissiveness and time salvation around cheaters in competition is frankly bizarre. What other argument is there than to refuse to engage. It is not difficult to simply never cheat, in the same way that it is not difficult to simp…

A good counter-example is s1mple from the Counterstrike: Global Offensive scene. He was known to have cheated when he was a teenager but went on a redemption arc that has seen him become not only the statistically best player to ever play the game but also one of its most mature and respected players. All the while under intense scrutiny for cheating because of his history. I don't think one and out forever is really…

It probably is also not a standard that can be practically upheld in an online setting. In both of these cases as I understand them, the cheater did so on their main account. If they'd created a new account to cheat on, would people have known?

Re: Magnus Carlsen resigns against Hans Niemann after one move

#268

Post by tiagod »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #264
krisoft wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people should put up some evidence of Niemann's cheating, how exactly he was receiving information on best possible moves, Do you see how absolutely impossible to do this, don't you?

I believe that cheating in over the board tournaments is hardly possible with all the security measures that are now taken by event organizers. If you suspect cheating you must come up with some explanation how exactly it is happening.

Do they Xray their clothing and shoes? Is there an anal inspection of sorts? Do they ban all RF devices and run wide-spectrum spectrum analysers?

Re: Magnus Carlsen resigns against Hans Niemann after one move

#269

Post by jagrsw »

alpaca128 wrote: post #182
WastingMyTime89 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He just refused to play against him. You don’t need to talk to make a comment. I don’t understand how an adult can defend Magnus there. As a public figure his attitude is simply shocking.

You interpreting Carlsen's actions as "tantrum" and calling for measures against the other player has just as much evidence as there is for the cheating. For a public figure his response is unusually quiet and calm to me. Though I'm not into chess so I don't know how it is perceived from that angle.

> unusually quiet and calm to me.

The crux seems to be that a genetl(wo)man would either directly accuse, or remain silent. What M.Carlsen is doing is de-facto accusing while saying "don't look at me, I didn't say it out loud". It's so... un.. hacker.. style.

Re: Magnus Carlsen resigns against Hans Niemann after one move

#270

Post by bombcar »

lordnacho wrote: post #254
concinds wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the chess community decides to trust Magnus and his credentials without any proof, that's their prerogative, the concept of criminal innocence doesn't come into play at all here. "Innocent until proven guilty" is not just a legal concept but a social norm. I'm a big Carlsen fan, but that same logic, applied to other domains, has led to witch-hunts throughout history, or character assassination/reputational damag…

> "Innocent until proven guilty" is not just a legal concept but a social norm. I think the question is whether it ought to be a social norm. What do you think of Prince Andrew? Hasn't been proven guilty. Should we just go about our business with him as usual? What about everyone else who settles a case? I think of "Innocent until proven guilty" as a sort of viral trope. People think it's the norm, so when the questi…

As a moral principle it’s kind of vague but you can take it as “when in doubt assume the best of people” which can work as an anti-prejudice tool.

But just because the bar is set so high for criminal guilt doesn’t mean we can or should use it elsewhere.

And much of personal interactions are basically “guilty until proven innocent” because the risk (even if minor) isn’t worth it. Most people have no problem being told they can’t share a bathroom stall with you even if you’d share one with a spouse.

Even civil cases have a lower bar, and many personal interactions are way lower.

And while I do have a problem with “do one crime and never be hirable again for anything” I do not have a problem with certain crime blocking certain types of work, and/or subjecting you to additional scrutiny.

Post reply on HN