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

81–90 of 1001 posts

Re: Dear Chess World

#81

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

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.

When Robert Fischer achieved an unprecedented scores in the pretenders matches prior to winning the champion title, I believe that the biggest factor was not the quality of the play of Fischer, but the way he mentally unbalanced and broke his opponents, who absolutely did not give a performance they were capable of.

Re: Dear Chess World

#82

Post by jdoliner »

It seems like if Nieman wants to clear his name he should offer Carlsen explicit permission to say whatever it is he can't. If Magnus is bluffing and that information doesn't amount to much he'd wind up looking a lot better.

Re: Dear Chess World

#83

Post by gizmo »

bombcar wrote: post #53
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.

I expect it's GDPR-covered or similar cheating examples from chess.com or whatever site it was that he saw all the list of cheaters from.

GDPR??? Not at all related.

Re: Dear Chess World

#84

Post by hellcow »

Dave_Rosenthal wrote: post #43
vikingerik wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The somewhat-concrete evidence is that analyzers have now found many instances where Niemann's moves correlate highly with engine-suggested moves. I don't know the details as to whether that claim is credible. Is this correlation really any more for Niemann than any other grandmaster of similar strength? Are the analyzers cherry-picking data points that fit the narrative? And of course it is possible that Niemann is…

There is a guy named Ken Regan who is one of the leading experts in this question of whether the correlation with engine moves is at a normal or abnormal level. His statement is that he analyzed the last two years of Hans' games and found no evidence of cheating. So, yeah, the people on Reddit are probably cherry picking. ( https://en.chessbase.com/post/is-hans-niemann-cheating-world... ) The counter to that is that…

Fabi (for those that don’t know, he’s another one of the best chess players in the world) gave a statement along the lines of, “I know of at least one case where I was certain cheating happened, and Regan’s analysis missed it, so take any of his analysis with a huge grain of salt.”

So here we have a whole bunch of the world’s best chess players and chess.com believing that Niemann repeatedly cheats, in addition to Niemann’s own admission to cheating in the past, and Regan taking the opposite stance.

Re: Dear Chess World

#85

Post by bombcar »

tptacek wrote: post #74
Victerius wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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 de…

Note that the above defamation is the US-based one, I believe.

Other countries have vastly different statues, and in some cases true statements of fact can be defamation (if they were not widely known, I believe).

Re: Dear Chess World

#86

Post by loxs »

Isn't it time to just abandon chess as a competitive sport? It's (mostly) a solved game for f* sake, move on. I will probably be downvoted to oblivion, but I'm absolutely serious and would love constructive commentary.

What's the big appeal of chess? We (as humans) can't beat computers. It's probably useful for further research, but I see absolutely no value in (human) competitions.

Re: Dear Chess World

#87

Post by unethical_ban »

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.

The best time to do the right thing is yesterday, the second best time is today.

Perhaps a person knows they should have done more sooner, but still chooses to do what they think is right when they make a decision.

Re: Dear Chess World

#88

Post by defen »

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)

If you're 49% sure someone cheated against you / would cheat against you, that's probably enough to make you never want to play against them, but also not enough to prevail in a court case.

Re: Dear Chess World

#89

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #74
Victerius wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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 de…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN