261–270 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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".
He did cheat in impactful events, and he admitted it.
It's very remarkable that Carlsen is suspicious of Niemann's game against him in Sinquefield, since there's a clear consensus among other top chess players that there was absolutely nothing unusual about it (or at least about the moves played).
>at least about the moves played You missed a large part. Some of his moves were "somewhat suspect". However, he was interviewed after the game with Magnus and he really could not explain why he was making the moves he made. Even the interviewers were almost laughing as he gave his "analysis" for his own moves. He played off his top engine moves as just getting lucky, while at the same time stating he didn't make oth…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When Robert Fischer achieved an unprecedented scores in the pretenders matches prior to winning the champion title, I believe that the biggest factor was not the quality of the play of Fischer, but the way he mentally unbalanced and broke his opponents, who absolutely did not give a performance they were capable of.
We can be reasonably sure that Fischer has not been cheating above and beyond unusual conduct. There hasn't been a way to meaningfully cheat. In our times however there are computers which can materially help, and there are technologies allowing someone to receive it, use of which is very difficult to detect without an unacceptably invasive search
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…
It is very unlikely a 2700 GM can beat Magnus on black pieces. Moreover the live coverage showed an Hans way too relaxed about moves with 100% accuracy he was pulling. He could also not give an explanation about of his moves in the game in an interview. This, coupled with Magnus complaining about low security standards in the tournament make all the things very suspicious.
Why are known cheaters even allowed to participate in top level tournaments? It’s insulting to all the other chess players. Magnus is setting the right example by refusing to play Niemann
Zero tolerance blacklisting of cheaters is probably the best way forward. If neither Niemann nor Carlsen recant, then I predict chess will fall into general disrepute like baseball or billiards. The way for the professional chess community to salvage this situation is with zero tolerance blacklisting of anybody caught cheating, even as a teenager.
It's very remarkable that Carlsen is suspicious of Niemann's game against him in Sinquefield, since there's a clear consensus among other top chess players that there was absolutely nothing unusual about it (or at least about the moves played).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 g…
It's not extremely rare. Stop pulling things out of your butt. THE FIRST GAME Hikaru opened when he tried to check his games was 100%. He opened a random fucking game!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is very unlikely a 2700 GM can beat Magnus on black pieces. Moreover the live coverage showed an Hans way too relaxed about moves with 100% accuracy he was pulling. He could also not give an explanation about of his moves in the game in an interview. This, coupled with Magnus complaining about low security standards in the tournament make all the things very suspicious.
But cheating wouldn't explain a relaxed state. You could easily expect that he'd be nervous as fuck to cheat OTB against Carlsen. This is just wildly speculative and ultimately meaningless.