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

71–80 of 1001 posts

Re: Dear Chess World

#71

Post by itronitron »

Victerius wrote: post #48
bombcar wrote: post #20

Dear Chess World, At the 2022 Sinquefield Cup, I made the unprecedented professional decision to withdraw from the tournament after my round three game against Hans Niemann. A week later during the Champions Chess Tour, I resigned against Hans Niemann after playing only one move. I know that my actions have frustrated many in the chess community. I'm frustrated. I want to play chess. I want to continue to play chess…

"I'm not saying Hans Niemann cheated in this very specific instance against me. I'm just saying he's a professional cheater, and that fact may or may not be related to my withdrawal in a game against him after just one move." Carlsen is all but accusing Niemann of having cheated against him. Why can't he go the extra step? Is this something his lawyers have advised him to do? (I don't have a dog in this fight)

Cheaters gonna cheat. Personally I don't think Carlsen needs to elaborate any further.

Re: Dear Chess World

#73

Post by [deleted] »

gmiller123456 wrote: post #41

I am limited in what I can say without explicit permission from Niemann What? I'd like him to explicitly state what rule/law/agreement prevents him from saying more. He explicitly accused him of cheating. I can't imagine what would prevent him from providing details.

[deleted]

Re: Dear Chess World

#74

Post by tptacek »

Victerius wrote: post #48
bombcar wrote: post #20

Dear Chess World, At the 2022 Sinquefield Cup, I made the unprecedented professional decision to withdraw from the tournament after my round three game against Hans Niemann. A week later during the Champions Chess Tour, I resigned against Hans Niemann after playing only one move. I know that my actions have frustrated many in the chess community. I'm frustrated. I want to play chess. I want to continue to play chess…

"I'm not saying Hans Niemann cheated in this very specific instance against me. I'm just saying he's a professional cheater, and that fact may or may not be related to my withdrawal in a game against him after just one move." Carlsen is all but accusing Niemann of having cheated against him. Why can't he go the extra step? Is this something his lawyers have advised him to do? (I don't have a dog in this fight)

Yes. Niemann has admitted to cheating in the past, and has apparently been banned from some past events for cheating. So Carlsen can safely relate to the public that he believes Niemann to be a "cheater". But to say for a fact that Niemann cheated in a specific match, he'd be communicating a statement of fact. If that statement is false, or could colorably be argued as false, then Niemann can take him to court for defamation, and even if Carlsen prevailed, it would still be painful and expensive.

Remember that statements of opinions, including opinions that are analyses of previously disclosed facts, are protected from defamation claims. Defamation can only consist of a damaging false statement of fact, or the allegation that you're aware of specific undisclosed facts like that to support your opinion.

Re: Dear Chess World

#76

Post by neaden »

bombcar wrote: post #40
neaden wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They are pretty accurate, though of course when you are dealing with the person at the very top it's going to be hard to say how accurate it is. I think broadly though most experts agree that Hans beating Magnus was an unlikely but possible ting to happen. For comparison a 1400 rated player, which is someone who plays and studies a decent amount of chess but isn't devoted, would have a 0.0000014% chance of beating Magnus.

Re: Dear Chess World

#78

Post by addicted »

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.

Magnus is claiming that cheating is widespread and a big problem in chess.

Who are all the other cheaters that Magnus has quit against?

Why is the only cheater he has publicly made a show of having a problem with in all these years the one who recently beat him OTB playing black?

Re: Dear Chess World

#79

Post by cmeacham98 »

gmiller123456 wrote: post #41

I am limited in what I can say without explicit permission from Niemann What? I'd like him to explicitly state what rule/law/agreement prevents him from saying more. He explicitly accused him of cheating. I can't imagine what would prevent him from providing details.

My guess is some sort of FIDE dispute process that binds both parties to (partial) secrecy.
Post reply on HN