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

341–350 of 1001 posts

Re: Dear Chess World

#341

Post by Tenoke »

Etheryte wrote: post #302
Tenoke wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In one of those games, Nieman was losing by 1.3 points in the first 10 moves despite being 100% according to this analysis so I'll take it with a grain of salt. This only looks at having moves within the top 3 engine moves done by one of the engines tested, and sometimes there's just 1-2 good moves so doing 1 out of 10 (or whatever) possible moves doesn't mean you did anything good. Further, it's unclear how cherry-p…

A 1.3 difference out of an opening sideline is neither rare nor lost, and mostly simply comes down to the fact that the engine doesn't understand the opening. Even the mod pin in the link you posted clearly outlines that this is a misleading way to frame this. It would be better to read more into the discussion before helping misinformation spread.

I didn't describe it as lost like the poster did, I said 'losing by 1.3' which is accurate. At any rate, if you actually did read deeper you'd see that losing by 1.3 is plenty relevant, when claiming 100% engine play correlation, and that the mod is somewhat cherry-picking. Further, playing openings where you are -1.3 in 2000 blitz is fine, but in super GM games 1.3 points down is more often than not pretty bad.

Re: Dear Chess World

#342

Post by usgroup »

boole1854 wrote: post #305
markers wrote: post #72

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

While interesting, this does not seem very convincing to me. They successfully show that Niemann was playing many games with a high percentage of "engine perfect" moves, but they do not do enough to show that this is inconsistent with what top players usually do. A whole distribution of scores is shown for Niemann but only limited summary statistics are shown for other top players. A proper comparison would involve s…

Well she shows 6+ games where he has 100% correlation with the engine. What are the chances?

Re: Dear Chess World

#343

Post by blangk »

roflyear wrote: post #266
epolanski wrote: post #206

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.

Quoted post unavailable.

No post body was provided.

Re: Dear Chess World

#345

Post by roflyear »

russellbeattie wrote: post #217

The questions I have about this are pretty basic: 1. How would Niemann have cheated? The shoe computer theory is a bit far fetched - are devices that small capable enough? Is he suspected of having an accomplice? 2. Why didn't Magnus just say something right away? He could have easily made his accusations at the moment to event organizers - quietly - and they could have had Niemann remove his shoes or something. Inst…

The tech is there, but the risk is insanely high, and it isn't easy.

It is extremely easy to cheat online. You just open an engine on your computer.

For OTB, you'd have to be really sophisticated, and most likely have a partner assist you. And you still have to be really, really good at chess - Hans, even if he's cheating, is still a 2600 rated player.

It is several orders of magnitude harder, so way less opportunity, and the risk is much, much higher. Hans would have to have nerves of steel, for sure, to pull it off. Not saying it is impossible.

But there's no evidence he cheats OTB, either.

Re: Dear Chess World

#346

Post by systemvoltage »

jdthedisciple wrote: post #216

I believe people might be seriously underestimating just how good Magnus may be at detecting cheating. Dude probably trains with computers regularly. He has a better memory than 10 average Joe's combined. He's been the absolute #1 of the world for what, 10 years now? He wouldn't risk his whole reputation for nothing. I personally take his suspicions very seriously, though I agree that evidence has to be presented soo…

Mangus is human after all, who occassionally make blunders of sub-GM levels: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=magnus+chess+bl...

That just shows that he is fallible, which I empathize with.

Also don't forget the bishop blunder by Nepo in the world championship against Magnus. That was a 1800 level blunder trapping the bishop. Nepo is in top 5 GM list.

The fact of the matter is that all GMs including Magnus have the potential to make blunders.

Re: Dear Chess World

#347

Post by fieryscribe »

syncerr wrote: post #227

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 kno…

Daniel Rensch and others have said that Magnus has not seen chesscom cheating algorithms or lists. It had been a rumor in the chess world for a while that Hans has cheated before

Re: Dear Chess World

#348

Post by devin »

smoldesu wrote: post #31
dgritsko wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They were both under contract at that point, so I don't think there was much choice in the matter.

Re: Dear Chess World

#349

Post by [deleted] »

jdthedisciple wrote: post #216

I believe people might be seriously underestimating just how good Magnus may be at detecting cheating. Dude probably trains with computers regularly. He has a better memory than 10 average Joe's combined. He's been the absolute #1 of the world for what, 10 years now? He wouldn't risk his whole reputation for nothing. I personally take his suspicions very seriously, though I agree that evidence has to be presented soo…

[deleted]

Re: Dear Chess World

#350

Post by bombcar »

School-Cotton wrote: post #267
MichaelCollins wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Baseball is in general disrepute? TIL.

It's fun to watch perhaps, but the world-wide mania over record chasing seems to have entirely died with the steroid usage around the Bonds era.
Post reply on HN