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

Dear Chess World

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 1001 posts

Re: Dear Chess World

#221

Post by nonethewiser »

peter422 wrote: post #21

For all the people defending Hans, he has admitted to cheating in real, official, prize money online tournaments, and chess.com believes that in his apology he still lied about the extent of his cheating. Maybe Hans did cheat OTB, maybe he didn't, but the tough part about reputation is it is very hard to build and very easy to break. And Hans had proven to the world that he would cheat. I personally don't think Hans…

> Maybe Hans did cheat OTB, maybe he didn't, but the tough part about reputation is it is very hard to build and very easy to break.

The problem is this was true a month ago. And a year ago. And 2 years ago. If he should be banned by reputation then it should have already happened. If they do it now they just weaponize cheating accusations.

Re: Dear Chess World

#222

Post by neaden »

landryraccoon wrote: post #171
neaden wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right but the claim he made is at 16 he cheated only in no-stakes games, not for prize money.

That argument doesn’t make sense to me. If someone has acknowledged that they will cheat when there are NO stakes, why does that make it less likely they will cheat if something is on the line? If anything someone who is already known to cheat “just because” is even more likely to cheat when there is something to gain.

The claim in the original comment that I replied to was that Hans had admitted to cheating in "real, official, prize money online tournaments", which was when he was 12.

As for cheating and stakes I think it all depends. His claim is he cheated when he was 16 to boost his rating so he could player higher level opponents on stream and boost his career. If you accept that claim it would make sense that he rationalized it that he was just cheating to get to his "true" Elo and stopped cheating once he got there. Now Chess.Com seems to believe that he cheated beyond that but they haven't specified more at this point.

Re: Dear Chess World

#223

Post by roflyear »

Invictus0 wrote: post #211
bombcar wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems interesting, any chess-knowing people willing to take the hit for the team and watch all 23 minutes?

He played several games with 100% correlation with what chess engines considered to be the best move, and also played in 5 consecutive tournaments with such a high fraction of engine-preferred moves that his performance rivals the best players in history at the pinnacle of their careers.

Yes, and so does.... everyone else that is 2600+. And lots of people who aren't.

Re: Dear Chess World

#224

Post by detaro »

zikduruqe wrote: post #214
cmeacham98 wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In chess you cheat by receiving external assistance. Nowadays, especially at the high level, that assistance is basically always from a computer. Other than that your guess is as good as mine as _how_ he could have received said assistance, I've seen some wild theories.

What theories? That would be interesting to read. A micro-vibrating motor in his shoe, buzzing morse code? f4 to g5 for example?

for some reason the wild theory in this particular instance has been "vibrating anal beads". No, I don't know why.

Re: Dear Chess World

#225

Post by TheAceOfHearts »

Maursault wrote: post #128

Carlson should just challenge Niemann to a 30 game over the board televised match in their shorts (no shoes, no shirt) at Madison Square Garden. With the revenue generated from ticket sales and advertising, they could both retire and international chess can put this episode behind them.

Inside a faraday cage, turn it into the world's first cage match.

Re: Dear Chess World

#227

Post by syncerr »

Hans is clearly cheating. Comparing his past games against what an engine would do is pretty damning. Chess engines are far superior to players and the best players in the world top out in the high 70s percent correlations (Magnus averages around 70%).

Hans has a string of games at 100% correlation[0], meaning he's playing perfect games. Past players who achieved this later went on to admit to cheating[1]. Magnus knows this because he owns part of chess.com and presumably sees the data.

Magnus has a lot riding on his statement. He wouldn't make it unless he was sure.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfPzUgzrOcQ

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A9bastien_Feller

Re: Dear Chess World

#228

Post by tgtweak »

bombcar wrote: post #146
markers wrote: post #72

In case you haven't seen it, some new evidence surfaced yesterday: https://youtu.be/jfPzUgzrOcQ

This seems interesting, any chess-knowing people willing to take the hit for the team and watch all 23 minutes?

Using an ultra-high ELO chess engine to score each possible move, then reversing through the players moves and seeing how often it would have been a positive move (one that shifts the balance of the game in your favor) - or perfect move (not sure which). It is extremely rare to make 100% perfect moves in a game, let alone a series of games. Typical gameplay for high level chess player doesn't peak over 72-75% for a given series of N games. Niemann has several tournaments over this and several games with 100% perfect moves. The inconsistency is also a concern since he goes from mid-60's to 78/79 in a span of one tournament.

His games against Magnus were exceedingly high.

Re: Dear Chess World

#229

Post by jobs_throwaway »

root_axis wrote: post #198
peter422 wrote: post #21

For all the people defending Hans, he has admitted to cheating in real, official, prize money online tournaments, and chess.com believes that in his apology he still lied about the extent of his cheating. Maybe Hans did cheat OTB, maybe he didn't, but the tough part about reputation is it is very hard to build and very easy to break. And Hans had proven to the world that he would cheat. I personally don't think Hans…

As an outsider to the chess world, this all seems like a roundabout way of saying "we have no evidence that he cheated, but in lieu of evidence let's go with gut feelings".

A documented history of cheating online counts as "no evidence" in your book?

Re: Dear Chess World

#230

Post by icambron »

peter422 wrote: post #21

For all the people defending Hans, he has admitted to cheating in real, official, prize money online tournaments, and chess.com believes that in his apology he still lied about the extent of his cheating. Maybe Hans did cheat OTB, maybe he didn't, but the tough part about reputation is it is very hard to build and very easy to break. And Hans had proven to the world that he would cheat. I personally don't think Hans…

But you can't go about punishing him this way.

If FIDE or Chess.com or whoever wanted to ban him from events for his past behavior--or players simply wanted to ostracize him by refusing to play in tournaments with him--they needed to have banned/ostracized him for that behavior. I don't think anyone would complain if Niemann were caught cheating and then permanently banned. That's what Carlsen implies he's after and it's fine.

In contrast, this is "well, you cheated in the past, but we're going to let you play, unless you play really well, in which case we'll assume you cheated". This is just not a sane way to go about it, and creates the scenario in which Niemann is playing with a sort of externally-imposed skill cap. An accusation has to come with evidence specific to that accusation, not some hazy combination of past history + unease with his play. This all sounds like a slow-motion tantrum, which Carlsen can get away with because he's Magnus Carlsen.

Post reply on HN