Live data from Hacker News

Titled Tuesday Cheating

dorianquelle.github.io

41–50 of 131 posts

Re: Titled Tuesday Cheating

#41

Doesn’t make much sense for Hikaru to cheat. He competes over the board where it’s much harder to cheat, and he makes most of his money through streaming, not through competition results.

The size of his streaming audience is largely predicated on his perceived skill though. So, he may hypothetically feel pressure to cheat in order to impress his audience.

Re: Titled Tuesday Cheating

#42
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Status-seeking is the reason folks focus on professional running, or professional chess, or any of these very hardcore, very difficult endeavors that have no practical purpose. Someone once commented that men make extraordinary efforts to impress women, yet in general have very little understanding of what women actually like. This explains jacked-up trucks, professional chess, professional running, etc EDIT: I'm tal…

Is there no room for enjoyment of the activity? Does every endeavour have to be couched in the language of self-consciousness?

So too, the appreciation of excellence

Re: Titled Tuesday Cheating

#43
post #8
post #2

Before anyone gets into how much cheating there is, notice the conclusion > I am convinced that there is no evidence that cheating increased after the chess boom in 2020, compared to the offline baseline. I am also convinced that there is no evidence of pervasive and consistent computer assisted cheating in titled tuesday tournaments. However, re "Since then, a former World Champion published an hour long video, and…

Kramnik has gone off the deep end. The "statistics" he is using make zero sense and whenever someone tried to counter him with actual mathematics he would just delete the comments.

I respect Kramnik a lot both as a player and as a commenter on current top chess. I thought his research on chess with the castling rules removed was fascinating, for instance.

I honestly watched his entire Youtube rant, and by the time it got to his actual data, I was so mentally drained from trying to understand the long, poorly structured 45 minute rant that preceded it, I was unable to even parse his figures and tables.

I think his focus on games that can vs can't lead to higher earnings is interesting. But his inability to communicate his ideas clearly and in good faith doesn't paint a picture of someone who understands what he's doing.

Re: Titled Tuesday Cheating

#44
post #41

Doesn’t make much sense for Hikaru to cheat. He competes over the board where it’s much harder to cheat, and he makes most of his money through streaming, not through competition results.

The size of his streaming audience is largely predicated on his perceived skill though. So, he may hypothetically feel pressure to cheat in order to impress his audience.

I'm not sure that translates very linearly. Most of the chess YouTube "stars" are not even GMs. Most of the viewers are hardly good players, so what you can learn from an IM is astronomical. Charisma and good at teaching are much better skills than a 1000 ELO difference imo. To your point, beating Magnus might drag a lot of people to his stream.

Re: Titled Tuesday Cheating

#45
post #16
post #3

Hikaru talking about the cheating allegation against him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zm2R--_fBj0 I'll add that he live streamed the tournament he was accused of cheating in. If you've ever watched how fast he moves and quite often pre-moves & talks through his strategy as he goes, it'd be very surprising to see that he cheated (and I don't even know how he'd go about doing so - he's faster than the engines!).

I don't think he was cheating, if just because he was playing a series of players far, far lower than his standard level, and he proves that level in tournaments that have far superior anti-cheating requirements. However, could he be cheating, if he wanted to, in ways undetectable by the livestreaming? Absolutely! At the GM level, just having the evaluation visible somewhere is more than sufficient to gain 100 points…

I agree with your analysis.

> That can be setup trivially somewhere out of view.

And that's the reason headphones are banned in tournaments.

It's a problem for streamers though, since they need headphones to avoid audio feedback.

Re: Titled Tuesday Cheating

#48

Why do so many chess experts, practitioners and commenters, with varying degrees of familiarity with the chess world, misspell Elo?

And why do they use Elo to refer to rating on chess.com and lichess? [They use Glicko/Glicko2].

The author has a short paragraph at the end about Glicko.

Re: Titled Tuesday Cheating

#49
post #8
post #2

Before anyone gets into how much cheating there is, notice the conclusion > I am convinced that there is no evidence that cheating increased after the chess boom in 2020, compared to the offline baseline. I am also convinced that there is no evidence of pervasive and consistent computer assisted cheating in titled tuesday tournaments. However, re "Since then, a former World Champion published an hour long video, and…

Kramnik has gone off the deep end. The "statistics" he is using make zero sense and whenever someone tried to counter him with actual mathematics he would just delete the comments.

Kind of embarrassing that he doesn't have the self-awareness especially after the false accusations that he cheated during his WC match and that whole scandal years ago.

Re: Titled Tuesday Cheating

#50

Shameless plug: f you're looking for a similar way to compare your online rating with the FIDE rating, take a look at my project: https://www.chessmonitor.com/ Like the author, I also use regression, but extended to non-title players. More information: https://www.chessmonitor.com/blog/2023-elo-calculation

Having a quick look at ChessMonitor, it looks like much of the analysis tools mirror what can be found on Lichess (unsure about Chess.com). Is the value providing the aggregate analysis between Lichess and Chess.com? Or is there functionality past what can be found on the respective sites?
Post reply on HN