This is easy to check/prove. Make them pass an x-ray machine and play alone in a Faraday cage. No external signal will pass while the cage still can send video through cables. This can be deployed automatically by organizers in next public event and is quite cheap, no more than a few thousand dollars.
Dear Chess World
351–360 of 1001 posts
Re: Dear Chess World
#352It's not convincing to say that Hans was cheating because few people can beat Magnus playing black when Magnus was playing poorly in that game. I still feel like more information that could come out at any moment that could swing the situation in either direction, and this statement doesn't say much. I wish Magnus and chess.com would come out with whatever extra information they have.
I don’t think you understand why cheating is so bad. Once you know your opponent COULD BE cheating, your approach changes entirely. You will know this if you played against Stockfish.
Re: Dear Chess World
#353Earlier quoted context omitted.
200 points difference means a 25% chance to win, so I doubt just 1 hint is enough to bridge that gap consistently. Many high level games are won by grinding out a small advantage. I'll take a 2700 with 3 hints against a 2800 though.
The "200 points difference means 25% chance to win" breaks down at the highest levels. It works fine near the middle of the bell curve -- i.e. 800-2000 Elo -- but once you get to 2200 Elo you are talking about the >99th percentile. For example, I don't know of a single 2400 player who can score an average of 0.25 against 2600 players. Even at my own mediocre level of 1800, I definitely do not score 0.25 against 2000…
>I don't know of a single 2400 player who can score an average of 0.25 against 2600 players
I mean, you can look at the stats. They play all the time and while it becomes less accurate at the highest ratings (more so at the 2800+ level), 2400 vs 2600 does still result in something in the general range of 0.25. However, if it's 0.1 (like in your example) then my point is even stronger since it would be even harder to turn that into a win consistently with just 1 hint.
>Even at my own mediocre level of 1800, I definitely do not score 0.25 against 2000 rated players.
If you are noticing that at your level, it is probably either selective memory or specific to your play as ELO-estimated winning chances hold up well enough at 1800-2000.
Re: Dear Chess World
#354Earlier quoted context omitted.
Enough with the fiction that cheating is a mistake, or that a 16 year old smart enough to be a chess grandmaster is simultaneously so underdeveloped that they have not learned the consequences of cheating. Your comparison with murder is ridiculous. First of all, teenage murderers are regularly sentenced to life in prison. A murderer is deprived of fundamental human liberties--Niemann is deprived of being able to comp…
> First of all, teenage murderers are regularly sentenced to life in prison Maybe in USA. In Europe some countries even have special sentences for young adults (older than 18 less than 21). Here's for Germany: "The maximum penalty for any crime committed by a person under 18 (or a young adult under 21 who is treated as a juvenile) is 10 years"
Fagin here, wondering what crime a child could commit that would get millions of dollars in resultant profit ...
Re: Dear Chess World
#355In 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?
FM Yosha puts forward a fairly convincing argument about odds and engine correlation, but another commenter rightly pointed out that these statistics are not seen as incriminating in and of themselves. Unfortunately, even when the preponderance of evidence seems to be against a player - best example is Sebastian Feller (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A9bastien_Feller) playing with superhuman accuracy at crucial moments, and whose team captain later admitted to helping him cheat - they can still cast enough doubt to be allowed to continue playing at the highest level.
Here is a blunder that Feller played on move 13 just over a month ago (https://new.chess24.com/wall/news/grandmaster-blunders-mate-...) - this same guy managed to draw against Magnus Carlsen in 2008, in a game where Carlsen also found the moves/mannerisms of his opponent highly unusual.
Re: Dear Chess World
#356Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this case it seems most of the unusual behavior occurred after the match, where (I've seen claimed) Niemann gave obviously wrong reasons why he had played so well on such an uncommon line, and was also not able to explain why he made particular choices he did playing it.
Not only did he fail to explain his reasoning in any satisfactory way, but the suggestions he gave as responses to alternative lines from his opponent were outright losing which showed that he had a poor grasp of the position. This is extremely suspicious behaviour from a player who had just defeated the world champion while using the black pieces. The consensus among the top GMs was that Hans’s postgame analysis was…
Could that not just be explained as nervousness? Not saying he didn't chest, but that's hardly evidence
Re: Dear Chess World
#357Earlier quoted context omitted.
Niemann has admitted cheating, but only in online chess, not over the board. That's not to say he should be allowed to play, but only to note that live play is kind of a different ball game compared to doing it online. Online, it's you alone in a room (with a second computer). Similar cheating over the board would require some kind of hidden communications device, and probably an assistant.
The largest state that we have successfully managed to isolate from communication with the rest of the universe is on the order of 15 qubits. I think you do not appreciate just how easy it is to get information through a channel. Or rather how difficult it would be to prove that such a channel was used. This is, however, irrelevant. Hans Niemann is a chess cheat. Allowing him to set the narrative to "I've only cheate…
No post body was provided.
Re: Dear Chess World
#358I 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…
The fact that Magnus fully understand all the implications of such a statement and still went forward with this speaks to how sure he is of his intuition. He will forever tarnish his reputation if ultimately it's proven that he was simply flat out wrong. He is basically saying that Hans is playing impossibly well and that he does not exhibit the same behavioral patterns as any other player. And that he also has acces…
If he can't provide the evidence, he should stay quiet or tell people to stop bothering Niemann until he is able to. I mean, his intuition is obviously very good, but in the end a serious league can't go by the intuition of the best player and secret info.
Re: Dear Chess World
#359Earlier quoted context omitted.
Niemann has admitted cheating, but only in online chess, not over the board. That's not to say he should be allowed to play, but only to note that live play is kind of a different ball game compared to doing it online. Online, it's you alone in a room (with a second computer). Similar cheating over the board would require some kind of hidden communications device, and probably an assistant.
> Niemann has admitted cheating, but only in online chess, not over the board. That's a distinction without a difference.
Wrong. I've stolen things (I'm sure you have too - theft can be really small!) does that mean I should be labeled a thief in perpetuity? Beyond that, does it mean that I should be publicly shamed for it?
Come on. You people need a heart.
Re: Dear Chess World
#360Carlson 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.
Doesn't really prevent the usage of vibrating anal beads ( https://kotaku.com/chess-champion-anal-bead-magnus-carlsen-h... )
To make things fair, both players will be encouraged to wear anal beads