Chess Is in Chaos Over Suspicion That a Player Cheated Against Magnus Carlsen (wsj.com) 86
When the world champion withdrew from a major tournament after a stunning loss, it ignited suspicions of foul play. Hans Moke Niemann, his opponent, denied any wrongdoing. Chaos ensued. The Wall Street Journal reports: Magnus Carlsen's 53-game unbeaten streak had been over for only a few hours when the reigning chess world champion made a move that indicated something was off. Carlsen had lost to 19-year-old American grandmaster Hans Moke Niemann at a prestigious tournament in St. Louis called the Sinquefield Cup when he announced, without explanation, that he was withdrawing from the whole event. The chess world was quick to read the tea leaves. "I think Magnus believes that Hans probably is cheating," said Hikaru Nakamura, an American grandmaster ranked No. 6 in the world, who added that the allegation remains "unproven." What has followed since Carlsen's exit is a supercharged scandal that is short on details and long on breathless speculation.
Carlsen, the world's top player, has said nothing publicly other than a not-so-cryptic tweet in which famous soccer manager Jose Mourinho protests the result of a match by saying: "If I speak, I am in big trouble." A spokesperson for Carlsen didn't respond to a request for comment. Niemann forcefully denied ever cheating at over-the-board chess -- while also conceding that he has previously cheated online. Tournament organizers, meanwhile, instituted additional fair play protocols. But their security checks, including game screening of Niemann's play by one of the world's leading chess detectives, the University at Buffalo's Kenneth Regan, haven't found anything untoward.
The controversy gained such momentum that top grandmasters are taking sides. In one camp are the chess professionals legitimizing the allegation and jumping to Carlsen's defense. In the other are the players who view the whole thing as a witch hunt. One competitor, Wesley So, said he could hardly sleep because of the drama. Another, Ian Nepomniachtchi, said that stamping out cheating completely would require extraordinary measures -- such as "playing naked in a locked room" to make sure no one was carrying any secret buzzers or other devices. "I don't see this happening," added Nepomniachtchi, who was Carlsen's last challenger for the World Chess Championship. The Russian had already expressed his surprise at Niemann's victory over Carlsen, calling it "more than impressive."
Carlsen, the world's top player, has said nothing publicly other than a not-so-cryptic tweet in which famous soccer manager Jose Mourinho protests the result of a match by saying: "If I speak, I am in big trouble." A spokesperson for Carlsen didn't respond to a request for comment. Niemann forcefully denied ever cheating at over-the-board chess -- while also conceding that he has previously cheated online. Tournament organizers, meanwhile, instituted additional fair play protocols. But their security checks, including game screening of Niemann's play by one of the world's leading chess detectives, the University at Buffalo's Kenneth Regan, haven't found anything untoward.
The controversy gained such momentum that top grandmasters are taking sides. In one camp are the chess professionals legitimizing the allegation and jumping to Carlsen's defense. In the other are the players who view the whole thing as a witch hunt. One competitor, Wesley So, said he could hardly sleep because of the drama. Another, Ian Nepomniachtchi, said that stamping out cheating completely would require extraordinary measures -- such as "playing naked in a locked room" to make sure no one was carrying any secret buzzers or other devices. "I don't see this happening," added Nepomniachtchi, who was Carlsen's last challenger for the World Chess Championship. The Russian had already expressed his surprise at Niemann's victory over Carlsen, calling it "more than impressive."
So... (Score:2, Funny)
An incumbent lost a competition and he/people suspect, without any evidence, that the other guy cheated?
Hmm...
Re: (Score:1)
Well, it depends on what you count as evidence. Does computer perfect play count? How about just a few computer perfect moves at the right moments? It is a somewhat subtle issue.
Re: (Score:3)
It wasn't computer-perfect play, and even after Hans first got an advantage, he missed the winning line. Magnus had to make more mistakes to manage losing the game!
Re:So... (Score:4, Informative)
No one claimed that it was computer-perfect play and, of course, it should have been drawn - Carlsen is not perfect. But when you look at Hans' analysis of the game and his claims of preparation for a highly unusual Carlsen line, I think that it does look a bit dubious. I agree that evidence is key.
Re: (Score:1)
I wouldn't get too much from his post analysis. Hans has never been coherent. He's some weird autistic kid, who speaks like a Californian surfer bro. Probably why Magnus felt like crap after losing the game.
That said Hans does have some talent. It's not like he's complete crap and probably would have gotten his GM norms earlier if not for covid. His live streams of him with Andrew Tang playing ping pong and chess at the same time while by simply shouting out chess moves like blind chess was entertainin
Re: So... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, picture this, you're Magnus Carlsen, and you play out a prepared line, one sufficiently obscure that hasn't been played much of course... And the guy responds confidently and quickly, as if he was in preparation too... And then a few moves down it turns out, those moves were really, really strong. A machine prepared reply, for a really unusual line. WTF? Is he cheating somehow? Or did someone tip him off about the prepared line?
Of course you're not playing optimally when such questions are gnawing at you.
Also, remember Carlsen does his homework prep. I'm sure he knew that Niemann had been caught cheating in online games before, and obviously he's deeply analyzed Niemann's recent games - maybe he'd seen something there that made him suspicious (warranted or not).
Carlsen has lost plenty of games before, he's lost longer win streaks, and he's lost to lower ranked players than Niemann. It's not simply that he lost that made him quit the tournament.
Re: (Score:3)
It should also be said that Magnus seemed to underestimate his opponent and chose a rather tame opening.
Re:So... (Score:5, Informative)
There's been some research on the topic [buffalo.edu].
Re: (Score:3)
There has been even accusations that he's using an vibrating anal plug to get signals in Morse Code.
Does Amazon list that under sex toy or chess equipment? :-) ]
[ If it only work while playing chess, I don't want it.
Re: (Score:2)
"There has been even accusations that he's using an vibrating anal plug to get signals in morse code. These accusations are just ridiculous. "
Indeed. It was Bruce Willis' watch that Christopher Walken had up there for 2 years.
Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)
One of the top chess trainers and authors in the world, Jacob Aagaard, explained the whole situation best:
https://forum.killerchesstrain... [killerchesstraining.com]
Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)
One of the top chess trainers and authors in the world, Jacob Aagaard, explained the whole situation best:
https://forum.killerchesstrain... [killerchesstraining.com]
This line in that article seems to be a common theme with people that lose and can't get over it.
“Magnus behaved like an entitled brat” is at least an equally reasonable theory.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, Magnus hasn't had to deal with losing very often.
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
To be fair, Magnus hasn't had to deal with losing very often.
Ya, but shit happens and kings always fall sooner or later.
The real test of character is how one handles that.
Re: (Score:2)
It's all begging the question. How was Magnus's handling of this being an entitled brat? He's made no formal accusation of cheating, and has withdrawn from the tournament based on suspicions.
It seems like people aren't talking about Magnus as much as they are talking about the endless naval gazing about what happened. We're literally passing judgement based purely on speculation. It's not Magnus whos is handling something poorly here, it's the chess peanut gallery.
Re: (Score:2)
has withdrawn from the tournament based on suspicions.
This is acting like a brat. He's caused a lot of problems for the organizers, and messed up the format of the tournament.
Re:So... (Score:4, Informative)
Chess.com just added their own fuel to the fire [twitter.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
They claim he cheated more than he admitted to.
Re:So... (Score:4, Informative)
For context, 2 weeks ago chess dot com announced buying Play Magnus for 8 figures, a deal that is still in progress of being completed.
Re:So... (Score:5, Informative)
I went back and looked at Hans' "confession." He was a bit disorganized (given he was speaking without notes, that's natural), but he admitted to cheating in three different ways:
1) When he was 12 and a friend gave him moves to play during a tournament.
2) While he was streaming, he cheated in unrated games.
3) While he was off stream, he cheated to get his rating up so he could play against higher rated players.
Chess.com is implying he cheated at some other time than those, a claim which is eyebrow raising. I am just sitting back waiting for the evidence to unfold.
Re: (Score:3)
2 and 3 was a single event, not separate events.
Chess dot com purchased the Play Magnus business 2 weeks and they're still finalizing the deal. That's what you're replying to. Major conflict of interest to get involved.
And they're banning him now? For historical conduct? Sleazy. They're no arbiter of ethics, that's for sure.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't think a ban for additional past cheating is unwarranted. Cheating is - and should be - a big deal. This is not some 800-rate player using an engine for LOLs, this is a pro player competing for money.
We don't know the details yet, which is reasonable as Hans seems to have been given a chance to respond to new information. If chess.com had gone public with anything new I'm sure people would complain he should have a right to respond, in private, first.
But imagine he cheats as a titled player. He gets
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think a ban for additional past cheating is unwarranted. Cheating is - and should be - a big deal.
The point is they already punished him for it, and it was done. Then they decided to punish him again.
So now, it's possible that more cheating has been uncovered, or he's cheated since he was another chance.
No, chess.com specifically did not say that.
Re: (Score:2)
2 and 3 was a single event, not separate events.
It was an 'event' in that it was going on for a while.
And they're banning him now? For historical conduct? Sleazy.
This part is true. And their latest statement with vague implications but zero evidence (or even concrete allegations) was not helpful.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So... (Score:2)
It does go into detail about the measures they put in place afterwards, but not why these weren't in place before. It even mentions the game getting a review by one of the world's leading Chess Detective (TIL...) who found nothing untoward.
So until they can prove that Niemann cheated, or hell even give some possible
Re: (Score:3)
But still, the lowest-rated player just beat the highest-rated player,
The highest-rated player didn't play as though he were high rated, though. He played surprisingly poorly, actually.
Re: (Score:3)
It's circumstantial, admittedly, but easily enough to warrant a closer examination of the facts.
Re: (Score:2)
Not without *ANY* evidence... Niemann has admitted to cheating when playing online.
It's circumstantial, admittedly, but easily enough to warrant a closer examination of the facts.
(1) Were they playing online? No. And from TFA: "Niemann forcefully denied ever cheating at over-the-board chess"
(2) His admission to previously cheating online isn't really even circumstantial evidence here as it relates to something else entirely, not the situation at hand. If your argument is that one statement (cheated online) matters, then his other statement (never cheated over-the-board) must also matter -- unless you're going to selectively believe him -- and, unless I'm reading this incorrectly,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
One tends to believe admissions more than denials for what I hope are obvious reasons.
Of course. Maybe he should rephrase things: :-)
Niemann forcefully admits to never cheating at over-the-board chess -- while also denying that he hasn't previously cheated online.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
...while also denying that he hasn't previously cheated online.
Slight problem there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
And from TFA: "Niemann forcefully denied ever cheating at over-the-board chess".
Interesting way to phrase the denial. It sounds as if he admits having cheated at other forms of chess.
Re: (Score:2)
And from TFA: "Niemann forcefully denied ever cheating at over-the-board chess".
Interesting way to phrase the denial. It sounds as if he admits having cheated at other forms of chess.
In TFS it's noted that he's admitted to cheating when playing chess online
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe he'll ask the right people in private to investigate cheating or, as another commenter has suggested, trace the leak out of his own camp.
Re: (Score:2)
I think this sort of thing is detectable when playing against an opponent but not provable. The type and length of pauses, the type of moves. As someone who knows little about chess or Magnus I have no idea which it is, but Magnus should be able to tell by feel if you he playing against a player inputing moves into a computer and reading out the results or going by memory/feel/skill.
Also The chess world had well defined skill rankings. They dont just play in secret 99% of the time and then surprised people
How? (Score:2)
How does one cheat at chess when there are so many people watching, and analyzing the play details? Move more than one piece using sleight of hand to distract? move a piece illegally?
Re: (Score:1)
oops I see it now. sorry.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The three theories I've heard are (not joking): suppository, morse-code shoes, and "something hidden in his hair."
Note that all three of these require a radio transponder and an accomplice.
The players are all wanded before their games. The next game after the accusations, the official event stream showed him being excessively wanded for a few minutes before the game, where he held a draw against another top player. Also, they had introduced a 15-minute delay to the broadcast, so any accomplice would have to
Re:How? (Score:4, Informative)
the official event stream showed him being excessively wanded for a few minutes before the game, where he held a draw against another top player.
Here is what they go through [youtube.com].
Re: (Score:2)
So, share it with us?
Cheater places a miniature phone or wifi sex toy in private parts; accomplice far away sends suggestions through Morse-coded vibrations. It apparently happened already, one solution was to broadcast the game with a 10 min delay so suggested moves would become useless. But it only works against remote accomplices. Local accomplice could discretely enter the moves on a mobile device, or use a hidden camera to send live footage. So they'd have to scan the players for radio-frequency devices (place a spy detect
Re: (Score:2)
playing naked in a locked room
I don't even want to know where you'd have to hide the cheating tool in such a case.
Re: How? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A Faraday cage would probably suffice. You could also just relieve spectators of their phones, which I'm a bit surprised isn't something that's already done.
Re:How? (Score:5, Interesting)
I heard of one case - the French team in an Olympiad, I think? - where accomplices would analyze the moves remotely, then send the correct move via text message to an accomplice in the playing hall. The accomplice in the hall would stand in a pre-determined place in the hall to signal to the player at the board. They weren't very nonchalant about it, though, and quickly aroused suspicion for "acting weird".
In this case, though, I don't think there's been any formal accusation of cheating, and it's just as likely that the real scandal is that someone on Magnus' team leaked his prep to Hans. The evidence in favour of that theory is that Hans claimed to have done prep based on a game of Magnus' which never happened. Following that thread suggests that Magnus suspected something, made up fake prep based on a fake game, and when Hans started talking about studying that fake game Magnus knew that he had a leaker on his team and quit the tournament.
But, like just about everything else in this story, that remains speculation.
Re: (Score:2)
Occam's Razor: Time Travel
Niemann traveled into the future, noted all the moves, then came back and changed things. It's debatable if that counts as cheating, but doesn't matter as Reality will be unraveling soon.
Re: (Score:1)
Heh, I was about to post this. That means there's more than just one of us who was thinking it. Hypnosis also comes to mind.
Re: (Score:1)
No, I think one of you went forward in time, read this thread and then came back and posted it.
Re: (Score:2)
Occam's Razor: Time Travel
Niemann traveled into the future, noted all the moves, then came back and changed things. It's debatable if that counts as cheating, but doesn't matter as Reality will be unraveling soon.
I disagree. A simpler (Occam-winning) explanation is that instead of traveling into the future and then returning to the past, he waited until after he lost, then traveled into the past and changed it! This way only requires activating the Time Machine once. Half the system complexity as your hypothesis.
Re: (Score:2)
Half the system complexity as your hypothesis.
And 1/2 the power draw -- very green, nice.
when the bookie tells to you lose you better do it (Score:2)
when the bookie tells to you lose you better do it if your want your debt to go away or you better come up with the funds.
Re: (Score:2)
2 weeks ago Magnus Carlsen sold his "Play Magnus" group in a deal that should give him personally somewhere in the $4-20m range. So it seems unlikely he lost for money.
Re: (Score:2)
The normal thing is to use a computer, or relay moves to the player via some obscure signals.
There was a case a few years back where the player's coach would stand in a particular place to indicate which move should be played.
Some people (most notably Elon Musk) have suggested small computers smuggled past security, but https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
So all I can gather from the article:
>> After the round began, the Grand Chess Tour announced that they are taking additional anti-cheating precautions, including a 15-minute broadcast delay and increased radio-frequency identification (RFID) checks.
This would imply that a cheater could have a remote controlled vibrating device giving coded advice, activated by an accomplice who is watching the broadcast and feeding the moves into a chess program.
Seems pretty insane to me, but doesn't mean it couldn't
Re: (Score:2)
Generally people cheat by getting external help. Someone outside uses a computer to analyse the game and then feeds hints back to the player through a clandestine channel.
There are various countermeasures that can be taken to make such cheating harder, but they tend to have the side effect of making the tournament more expensive to run and/or less attractive for players and spectators.
WSJ (Score:3)
For those who don't want to give a crapton of money to read a single WSJ article:
https://www.theguardian.com/sp... [theguardian.com]
https://www.chess.com/news/vie... [chess.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I had NoScript running, and it still hit the paywall.
Re: (Score:2)
A good, informed, and fair article: https://en.chessbase.com/post/... [chessbase.com]
Don't broadcast live and use signal blockers.. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If we were living in the Soviet era, those things would definitely be a problem. At one point in those days, a player was accused of irradiating another player with help from the KGB. Eventually they ended up threatening to kill him if he won, so he lost. (That was Karpov vs Korchnoi).
He admits he cheated online.... (Score:5, Insightful)
That's way bigger than they make it out to be. Sure it was online, but it shows he cares more about a random, meaningless win than about the sport of the game. That's not a healthy way to approach competition.
Re: (Score:1)
Just wait until you get in real trouble and are in front of a judge. Showing a pattern of prior bad acts is damning as hell.
As far as chess goes, I'm sure never going to play against you. Screw that. If you want to see what challenges lie ahead, play a bot, rather than cheat against a sincere opponent.
Cheaters are weak.
Re: (Score:3)
"When I cheat, it's to see what challenges might lie ahead."
How noble of you.
Re: (Score:2)
His idea is that if he wants to improve, he needs to play against the best players. He cheated to get his rating up so he could play against those players.
I don't agree, but there's certain logic to it.
I've never been good at chess. (Score:1)
Re: I've never been good at chess. (Score:2)
Try having kids. That should give you at least a couple years of victory.
play naked... or in a Faraday cage? (Score:2)
Great idea! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Have you seen the average chess player?
Quite seriously, even my idea of a "hot system admins of the month" calender had more merit.
Play naked (Score:2)
I like the idea of playing naked. Well, at least for women's competitions.