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

31–40 of 1001 posts

Re: Dear Chess World

#31

Post by smoldesu »

dgritsko wrote: post #26
smoldesu wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the tone I'm getting from reading this basically boils down to "I was uncomfortable with how he played so I quit". Isn't that part of the metagaming in chess? Poker has always been about unnerving your opponent through stoicism or deception. I don't see why chess can't have the same layer of subtlety, and if it really concerns him then he should be able to wear a visor to block everything but the game board. Ot…

I think it boils more down to this: "I was uncomfortable with how he played because he has a history of cheating so I quit" Which is entirely reasonable, if you think that cheating is an "existential threat" to chess itself.

If he didn't want to play against him, he shouldn't have already done it weeks ago and then proceed to agree to a rematch, which he doesn't cancel until the last minute. I find it very hard to believe that Magnus only found out about Hans' history after the first move... unless he had someone assisting him in realtime.

Re: Dear Chess World

#32

Post by [deleted] »

MauranKilom wrote: post #25
perihelions wrote: post #15

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).

The reasons Carlsen gives for being suspicious are not "the moves played were unusual" but about Niemann's behavior surrounding them.

[deleted]

Re: Dear Chess World

#34

Post by neaden »

abnry wrote: post #4

I am disappointed with Magnus. He is misusing the weight of his reputation even if cheating is a big deal in chess. The first mistake was still choosing to play when he had reservations once Hans was invited. The second mistake was quitting the tournament and messing up the standings once he lost. The third mistake was making an insinuation through a tweet. The fourth mistake was resigning in two moves his next game…

Yeah, I think Magnus is making a mistake conflating two things. It is totally fine to think that Nieman should have been punished more for online cheating, but combining it with his accusation of cheating at the Sinquefield Cup come off as sour grapes. Watching the Crypto Cup there was obviously no love lost between the two of them but they played each other, it's not until Magnus losses to Hans (which based on their rating had about a 5% chance of happening) that this refusal to play happens.

Re: Dear Chess World

#35

Post by bombcar »

smoldesu wrote: post #18
solarparade wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is possible to have a device in your shoe that will not trip metal detectors that can feed moves from the outside. It doesn't even have to be that complex, for a super GM even just a simple signal that indicates "this position has a crushing move, spend extra time thinking on this move" is enough to significantly improve their performance Unless you catch the method of cheating directly, it's basically impossible…

If that's a big concern, why would you even allow audiences to spectate in real-time? If the integrity of the game takes precedent over the spectacle of the match, why do we care about anything but the results? This reductive approach to looking at cheating will just end with both of these shmucks sitting naked in an empty room, surrounded by an audience of a single referee who's job is to stop them from physically a…

The extent that anti-cheating measures in Contract Bridge have gone to is hilariously insane. The players are effectively in telephone booths and cannot say or do anything except mark a bid indicator or slide a card, and at regulated intervals, too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheating_in_bridge

Bridge is an imperfect information game so the opportunities are much larger, but something similar can happen in chess.

Re: Dear Chess World

#36

Post by bombcar »

flawn wrote: post #30
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…

I could also decide to cheat when being in the top players in the world. Even better, because I would only need to use my cheats sometimes and hide it even better because my knowledge holds up enough.

The second best player in the world would be best positioned to cheat; they'd need a small advantage to become best.

And the best player in the world could cheat, too, reducing their mental load and taking it easy.

Both cases would likely be exposed by the cheaters getting lazy.

Re: Dear Chess World

#37

Post by peter422 »

flawn wrote: post #30
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…

I could also decide to cheat when being in the top players in the world. Even better, because I would only need to use my cheats sometimes and hide it even better because my knowledge holds up enough.

Yes and I think this is the real risk that Magnus or others who cares about chess are worried about. Not the 1200 player who plays like the world champion which is blatently obvious, but a 2700 player who selectively uses computer assistance to play like a 2800 and get into the elite circuit of the top players (which also is where all the money is).

Re: Dear Chess World

#38

Post by smoldesu »

bombcar wrote: post #35
smoldesu wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's a big concern, why would you even allow audiences to spectate in real-time? If the integrity of the game takes precedent over the spectacle of the match, why do we care about anything but the results? This reductive approach to looking at cheating will just end with both of these shmucks sitting naked in an empty room, surrounded by an audience of a single referee who's job is to stop them from physically a…

The extent that anti-cheating measures in Contract Bridge have gone to is hilariously insane. The players are effectively in telephone booths and cannot say or do anything except mark a bid indicator or slide a card, and at regulated intervals, too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheating_in_bridge Bridge is an imperfect information game so the opportunities are much larger, but something similar can happen in chess.

Then by all means, I'd encourage Carlsen to start the XFL of chess tournaments! The XCL?

Whatever the case is, I don't think a public crusade is the right option. If he had conclusive evidence of him cheating during the match, he wouldn't have made such a protracted statement on it weeks afterwards.

Re: Dear Chess World

#39

Post by browningstreet »

These situations are never great.. there's no "best way to handle things" when the drama reaches a certain level.

Carlsen specifically mentions that there are Niemann details he can't or won't reveal. Niemann could release him from that confidence, but I think Carlsen's reputation is strong enough that doubting this doesn't seem reasonable.

Personally, I think shading Carlsen, in isolation, seems misguided to me.

Re: Dear Chess World

#40

Post by bombcar »

neaden wrote: post #34
abnry wrote: post #4

I am disappointed with Magnus. He is misusing the weight of his reputation even if cheating is a big deal in chess. The first mistake was still choosing to play when he had reservations once Hans was invited. The second mistake was quitting the tournament and messing up the standings once he lost. The third mistake was making an insinuation through a tweet. The fourth mistake was resigning in two moves his next game…

Yeah, I think Magnus is making a mistake conflating two things. It is totally fine to think that Nieman should have been punished more for online cheating, but combining it with his accusation of cheating at the Sinquefield Cup come off as sour grapes. Watching the Crypto Cup there was obviously no love lost between the two of them but they played each other, it's not until Magnus losses to Hans (which based on their…

How accurate are those rating calculations? Is it really "Hans vs Magnus will be 1 vs 19 win rate" or is it something else?

I would assume that I'd have absolutely no chance of winning against either even with a handicap.

Post reply on HN