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

Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

incoherency.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 262 posts

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#121

Post by emodendroket »

bo1024 wrote: post #79
icelancer wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, somehow I missed this. Pretty wild accusations from Magnus and Hikaru on this. Hans just had a horrific tournament in his last attempt, which makes this whole thing pretty interesting. Hans didn't play engine perfect lines when beating Magnus in the Sinquefield Cup, though he obviously played extremely accurately.

It doesn't sound like Magnus has made any accusation, right?

I'd say the video attached to this tweet is rather clearly insinuating some accusation though I haven't been following this saga.

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#122

Post by ivalm »

icambron wrote: post #114
ivalm wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can always say 40% cheater, 60% non cheater in this one game, but this updates the priors for future game considerations. At some point the priors will be such that the belief in the risk of cheating (which needs not be more than 50%) will cause the player to not be invited.

I don’t think this is right. The idea seems to be that his post-game interview shows he didn’t understand the positions very well despite playing them accurately, so he may have cheated. But a) today there was a huge amount of extra security and specific scrutiny on him, b) he drew despite having a substantial advantage at one point, and c) a bad interview where he fumbled some stuff would be a nothing-burger if it h…

I agree that he probably did not cheat vs firouzja. Even vs Carlson my money is at most the line magnus wanted to play somehow got leaked. It’s hard to imagine getting live engine support otb at a modern tournament.

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#125

Post by searealist »

ivalm wrote: post #102
searealist wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's binary. Either he did cheat today or he did not. If he did not then who cares what his post analysis looks like after drawing the #4 player in the world and being +3 at some point. The only reasonable analysis is to declare him a cheater today or discard the interview. To say that the interview would point to him cheating vs Magnus but not today is nonsense.

You can always say 40% cheater, 60% non cheater in this one game, but this updates the priors for future game considerations. At some point the priors will be such that the belief in the risk of cheating (which needs not be more than 50%) will cause the player to not be invited.

The point is that people keep bringing his post game interview today which is only relevant if he cheated in today's game, when security and scrutiny were at their highest.

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#126

Post by sgjohnson »

bo1024 wrote: post #79
icelancer wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, somehow I missed this. Pretty wild accusations from Magnus and Hikaru on this. Hans just had a horrific tournament in his last attempt, which makes this whole thing pretty interesting. Hans didn't play engine perfect lines when beating Magnus in the Sinquefield Cup, though he obviously played extremely accurately.

It doesn't sound like Magnus has made any accusation, right?

Yes, because he's far too professional to do that without ironclad proof.

And even if he had ironclad proof, he might still not go public.

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#127

Post by sgjohnson »

bjourne wrote: post #45
fasthands9 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know very little about chess. Do computers play like top humans? Or different stylistically? ie - if you were a top player and looking at the moves of an opponent, could you discern if the style was more similar to a top rated human or a top rated computer?

Yes, you could very easily do that. However, the theory is that cheaters would let the engine decide only 3-4 critical moves during a game and that would be enough to turn the tide in their favor. In chess small advantages compounds so this computer help would be enough for grand masters to beat the world champion. A cheater that understands cheating countermeasures could easily fly under the radar that way.

The problem with this approach is that you'd still need to be able to correctly identify those critical moments in the game, and a single move won't help you. You need the entire line.

Which would still require a considerable skill. If you can't figure out why a single move is brilliant, you won't be able to find the entire line.

If stockfish tells you the entire line, and the opponent plays something that wasn't included in stockfish's line (because it's worse), you're also going to be at a loss.

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#128

Post by _the_inflator »

nebulousthree wrote: post #123

We need a tournament that allows for engines. That way the humans are merely avatars of NNs, and may the best engine win. This may also uncover lots of useful insight for the "all-natural" human tournaments.

How would this solve the problem of cheating? What is "the best engine"? An Engine requires rules as well. Cheating is always involved when there are rules. That's why it is called cheating.

The idea of professional cheating is not to tell anyone about it. That's why undetected case are usually higher.

Re: Cheating at chess with a computer for my shoes

#129

Post by sgjohnson »

zibby8 wrote: post #80
sharedfrog wrote: post #3

This is relevant to today's events because Magnus Carlsen just withdrew from a tournament[1] after yesterday's loss to a significantly lower rated opponent who had previously been suspended for cheating on chess.com. The tournament organizers have also implemented additional anti-cheating protocols starting today. Whatever comes out of these accusations, the chess world will sure enjoy its new infusion of drama. [1]…

Is there any evidence Hans Niemann was suspended specifically for cheating? I’ve seen multiple unsubstantiated claims, but no source that definitively states he was suspended for cheating.

> but no source that definitively states he was suspended for cheating.

And no source will. I'm not sure why chess.com didn't make it public (by a notice on his profile that his account was suspended for Fair Play violations).

But yes, the only 2 entities that can definitively state that are:

1. chess.com

2. Hans himself

Not sure why chess.com won't, but Hans won't for obvious reasons.

Post reply on HN