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

Chess Investigation Finds U.S. Grandmaster ‘Likely Cheated’ More Than 100 Times

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 339 posts

Re: Chess Investigation Finds U.S. Grandmaster ‘Likely Cheated’ More Than 100 Times

#301

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

Taek wrote: post #254
Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever happened during online play on a second rate chess site is hardly a reason to ban player from OTB events without evidence of cheating in such events.

chess.com is a first rate entity in the chess world (a peer of FIDE and lichess), and Hans was caught cheating in events that had cash prizes. Hans cheated for money, that's plenty of indication that he would cheat in more important situations as well.

Chess.com has no problem allowing Niemann to participate in tournaments after they allegedly 'caught' him, and they only became very principled after their business partner Carlsen had lost to Niemann and instigated the conflict in a very disingenuous way. In any court their testimony would be thrown out.

Also, he allegedly cheated for money at 12yo. Yeah, right, that's definitely a grave unforgivable sin that should ruin his whole career. /s

Re: Chess Investigation Finds U.S. Grandmaster ‘Likely Cheated’ More Than 100 Times

#302

Post by [deleted] »

antiterra wrote: post #45
selfmodruntime wrote: post #22

The fact that an athlete in a competitive sport was allowed to partake in an event even after admitting to cheating not only once, but twice, is outrageous in itself.

The admissions were from when he was 12 and 16; many so societies generally believe in redemption from childhood transgressions.

[deleted]

Re: Chess Investigation Finds U.S. Grandmaster ‘Likely Cheated’ More Than 100 Times

#303

Post by jimmySixDOF »

largepeepee wrote: post #189
mzs wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cause they shared Dlugy's private emails last week? Cause they leaked this report to the WSJ before putting it on their site? Cause Rensch worded the non-denial denial specifically like that?

Like I had mentioned previously, why would they reveal their entire hand? It makes sense to show the relevant part of their upcoming case and who knows what kind of agreement they had with Dlugy and with lawyers before deciding to reveal that snippet. Like in poker. Just because they showed one card, doesn't mean they are now obligated to show their hand.

Yes if there are legal avenues this takes it will involve Dlugy and the Chess Max Academy. The problem is unless there is a caught in the act smoking gun it's all lot of statistics and inuendio that's very hard for anyone to prove in either direction. I'd feel more comfortable if Chess.com ran the exact same report they are releasing now on 50 other top players to see how close to a hundred anomalies they get. Still its a fascinating story with deep implications far beyond the world of chess.

Re: Chess Investigation Finds U.S. Grandmaster ‘Likely Cheated’ More Than 100 Times

#304

Post by Taek »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #301
Taek wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

chess.com is a first rate entity in the chess world (a peer of FIDE and lichess), and Hans was caught cheating in events that had cash prizes. Hans cheated for money, that's plenty of indication that he would cheat in more important situations as well.

Chess.com has no problem allowing Niemann to participate in tournaments after they allegedly 'caught' him, and they only became very principled after their business partner Carlsen had lost to Niemann and instigated the conflict in a very disingenuous way. In any court their testimony would be thrown out. Also, he allegedly cheated for money at 12yo. Yeah, right, that's definitely a grave unforgivable sin that should…

He cheated in the 2020 cash prize tournent SCC Grand Prix at the age of 17.

If you are going to be snarky, at least be correct.

Re: Chess Investigation Finds U.S. Grandmaster ‘Likely Cheated’ More Than 100 Times

#305

Post by ratg13 »

hollerith wrote: post #241
darkwizard42 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As mentioned in the article they are in talks to buy Magnus's app Play Magnus. That being said, if they have literal screenshots of the discussions between Niemann and chess.com admitting to cheating and appealing the ban, those seem like smoking guns in addition to all this other analysis

>if they have literal screenshots of the discussions between Niemann and chess.com admitting to cheating Screenshots are easy enough to fake perfectly that if I didn't trust a party to give an honest summary of the discussion and (as in the current stake) thousands of dollars or more is at stake, then I wouldn't trust screenshots either.

If you are one of the parties in the conversation, then it stands to reason that you have more than screenshots.

Re: Chess Investigation Finds U.S. Grandmaster ‘Likely Cheated’ More Than 100 Times

#306

Post by ratg13 »

pcj-github wrote: post #265

It is a premature conclusion that Hans was cheating in this game. Let the proper process play out, whatever that may be. Magnus has not presented any actual evidence. Chess.com is not an impartial player here in this drama and cannot be considered source-of-truth (they just purchased Magnus' startup for ~$80M; their fortunes are linked and would be subject to similar biases). WSJ article has not really done a deep di…

As Magnus pointed out, the issue is more about how can you trust that a regular cheater is not cheating in a particular game if the regulators aren't doing enough to prevent it.

Re: Chess Investigation Finds U.S. Grandmaster ‘Likely Cheated’ More Than 100 Times

#307

Post by ajkjk »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #288
ajkjk wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is definitely not indistinguishable, both because "someone with this rating shouldn't be winning like this" and because engine moves look very different than human moves, especially at lower ratings.

Interesting. How true is that at the top levels of play? What do you think the success rate is for online players telling an engine from a human? 1% 99%

At top levels it gets closer -- often human play is compared to engine play and people will discuss which moves were 'engine-like' vs 'human', and a significant achievement would be to play the engine moves on every turn. Although it should be said that engine moves are not always necessarily the best moves positionally, nor the moves with the highest win % versus a human (because you can 'trick' a human, whereas the engine can't trick itself so it will never prefer a move like that)... but they are always the best moves tactically.

In middling ratings, if I was allowed to look at the engine (in a Lichess replay for instance) I'd guess I can tell a player using the engine with 99+% accuracy. People _always_ lose on tactics (or misplayed opening lines, misplayed endgames, etc). Engines never do. At high ratings I assume this goes down, especially if the players are playing 'boring' draw-ish lines, in which the best moves are fairly obvious most of the time.

Re: Chess Investigation Finds U.S. Grandmaster ‘Likely Cheated’ More Than 100 Times

#308

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

Taek wrote: post #304
Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chess.com has no problem allowing Niemann to participate in tournaments after they allegedly 'caught' him, and they only became very principled after their business partner Carlsen had lost to Niemann and instigated the conflict in a very disingenuous way. In any court their testimony would be thrown out. Also, he allegedly cheated for money at 12yo. Yeah, right, that's definitely a grave unforgivable sin that should…

He cheated in the 2020 cash prize tournent SCC Grand Prix at the age of 17. If you are going to be snarky, at least be correct.

*allegedly cheated. We are yet to see any conclusive proofs of it. There are no any proofs of him cheating in any of the OTB events he took part it.

Re: Chess Investigation Finds U.S. Grandmaster ‘Likely Cheated’ More Than 100 Times

#309

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

Retric wrote: post #245
Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not an evidence at all . Things look rather damning only if you are already biased.

Are you suggesting the unbiased stance should be to ignore all prior evidence? People repeat themselves and form habits.

Whatever people do at young age does not have to define the rest of their lives. Did you never do anything stupid in your life?

Also, I don't know why alleged cheating when playing on some site should affect OTB tournament games. They are even governed by different bodies! Just have really thorough anti-cheating measures in place, and see how strong he plays.

Re: Chess Investigation Finds U.S. Grandmaster ‘Likely Cheated’ More Than 100 Times

#310

Post by Bud »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #149
Bud wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet earlier in this thread, you were incredulous about even the possibility that a chess game state could be entered into software or communicated during play. Which is clearly a ludicrously blind statement. So pardon us if it's hard to be particularly impressed by, well, whatever you are impressed or not impressed by. Because you don't seem to have much grasp on the basics involved, here.

> Which is clearly a ludicrously blind statement. This statement came from an experiment I conducted. I just tried playing lichess 3+2 game while running a nearby chess.com/analysis on a second display. ... ... and I was barely keeping up with all the clicks, and in the endgame was unable to keep up. So no, efficient cheating in fast games requires at least a special training, and better some automated software to ke…

So because you weren't able, therefore nobody is able? Including teenagers who have had years to practice their cheating skills?
Post reply on HN