Magnus Carlsen Finally Speaks On Chess Cheating Scandal, Sows Even More Chaos (vice.com) 131
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: Chess's top-ranked player, Magnus Carlsen, has finally spoken about the ongoing alleged cheating scandal that has rocked the chess world for the last several weeks and was reignited when Carlsen resigned in protest after making one move against Hans Niemann. Niemann, of course, was accused of cheating against Carlsen earlier this month, but no one has been able to prove this, nor has a mechanism for the supposed cheating been proven.
"I think the whole world is wondering, what is the reason you withdrew [against Niemann]?" a newscaster with Chess24 asked. "Unfortunately I cannot particularly speak on that," Carlsen said. "But, you know, people can draw their own conclusion and they certainly have. I have to say I'm very impressed by Niemann's play, and I think his mentor Maxine Dlugy must be doing a great job." "I will not comment on that," he added when asked if he was accusing Niemann of cheating. He was then asked if he was accusing Dlugy, who is a chess grandmaster, of helping Niemann cheat: "No, I will not say more about that subject ... I hope to say a little bit more after the tournament." Carlsen was then asked if he thought cheating was a problem in chess. "I think individual people will answer the question differently depending on their own experiences. Regardless of whether it's a massive problem or not, it's, I think, fairly easy to cheat. On a general basis, cheaters in the future, it should not be taken lightly neither online nor over the board."
Chess watchers believe that by namedropping Maxine Dlugy, Carlsen is putting down more breadcrumbs. Dlugy is is a Russian-born, American chess grandmaster who currently operates the Chess Max Academy in Manhattan. In July, Dlugy posted a photo with "my student Hans Niemann," congratulating him on "becoming a top 50 player in the world! Go Hans!" After Niemann beat Carlsen earlier this month, Dlugy posted a congratulatory message: "Just 16 months ago or so, I recommended to Hans to really focus on endings. He devoted a lot of time to this pivotal part of the game and today I am proud to say that his endgame play is sufficient to beat the reigning World Champion from a better position. That's powerful! Hans Niemann -- Chess speaks for itself!"
Redditors were quick to point out, however, that Dlugy has his own controversy. Dlugy has been removed twice from a weekly Chess.com tournament called Titled Tuesday, in 2017 and 2020. Benjamin Bok, a chess grandmaster and Twitch streamer, for example, made a whole segment delving into some of Dlugy's old Chess.com matches and pointing out that Dlugy was suddenly removed from Chess.com with no explanation: "Generally that only means one thing," Bok said, not elaborating on what it means, but heavily implying that it means he was caught cheating. "Draw your own conclusions. Draw your own conclusions. That's all I'm going to say." "Question becomes: Is perhaps Dlugy Hans' accomplice, in case Hans is cheating? We'll have to wait and see," Bok says. "But the fact that Magnus makes that statement and drops his name, it means that he knows something we don't know. You can't just drop someone's name in there without really knowing stuff. I feel like he knows something really big."
"I think the whole world is wondering, what is the reason you withdrew [against Niemann]?" a newscaster with Chess24 asked. "Unfortunately I cannot particularly speak on that," Carlsen said. "But, you know, people can draw their own conclusion and they certainly have. I have to say I'm very impressed by Niemann's play, and I think his mentor Maxine Dlugy must be doing a great job." "I will not comment on that," he added when asked if he was accusing Niemann of cheating. He was then asked if he was accusing Dlugy, who is a chess grandmaster, of helping Niemann cheat: "No, I will not say more about that subject ... I hope to say a little bit more after the tournament." Carlsen was then asked if he thought cheating was a problem in chess. "I think individual people will answer the question differently depending on their own experiences. Regardless of whether it's a massive problem or not, it's, I think, fairly easy to cheat. On a general basis, cheaters in the future, it should not be taken lightly neither online nor over the board."
Chess watchers believe that by namedropping Maxine Dlugy, Carlsen is putting down more breadcrumbs. Dlugy is is a Russian-born, American chess grandmaster who currently operates the Chess Max Academy in Manhattan. In July, Dlugy posted a photo with "my student Hans Niemann," congratulating him on "becoming a top 50 player in the world! Go Hans!" After Niemann beat Carlsen earlier this month, Dlugy posted a congratulatory message: "Just 16 months ago or so, I recommended to Hans to really focus on endings. He devoted a lot of time to this pivotal part of the game and today I am proud to say that his endgame play is sufficient to beat the reigning World Champion from a better position. That's powerful! Hans Niemann -- Chess speaks for itself!"
Redditors were quick to point out, however, that Dlugy has his own controversy. Dlugy has been removed twice from a weekly Chess.com tournament called Titled Tuesday, in 2017 and 2020. Benjamin Bok, a chess grandmaster and Twitch streamer, for example, made a whole segment delving into some of Dlugy's old Chess.com matches and pointing out that Dlugy was suddenly removed from Chess.com with no explanation: "Generally that only means one thing," Bok said, not elaborating on what it means, but heavily implying that it means he was caught cheating. "Draw your own conclusions. Draw your own conclusions. That's all I'm going to say." "Question becomes: Is perhaps Dlugy Hans' accomplice, in case Hans is cheating? We'll have to wait and see," Bok says. "But the fact that Magnus makes that statement and drops his name, it means that he knows something we don't know. You can't just drop someone's name in there without really knowing stuff. I feel like he knows something really big."
I don't know (Score:4, Insightful)
I wait until all the evidence is revealed before deciding.
One thing is certain: anti-cheating detection methods are all getting an upgrade in the near future.
Re:I don't know (Score:5, Insightful)
One thing is certain: anti-cheating detection methods are all getting an upgrade in the near future.
Probably not. Anti-cheating is basically an impossible task when players are relatively closely matched, as that is the case here. You cannot rely on any technological detection method, as there are just too many possibilities and you would need to think of all of them. You can also not rely on players suddenly exhibiting skills far above their level.
The simple fact of the matter is that Carlsen may have lost fair and square and could not deal with that. Or that Niemann cheated in a way that is impossible to detect at this time.
Re: (Score:2)
Definitely. People have been talking about the upgrades they are doing, including better statistical methods, and better hardware (ie, bringing the metal detectors to tournaments and scanning radio waves), and punishing people more strictly for cheating online (previously, if you cheated online that wouldn't get you banned from live tournaments).
We don't know exactly how the anti-cheating methods will change, but they are definitely going to be beefed up.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, they will put up a show. But I do not think there is much they can actually do besides that.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's what I'm talking about:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
In the real world, the normal method is to make a tri-layer chessboard with kryptonite as the middle layer, but since that's kind of expensive, a lot of tournaments just go with making the chessboard bullet proof. It works well enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty easy: Look at the scenes. Wallhackers are blatantly obvious, same as aimbot users. That is unless they are pretty good players. But the real problem is that it costs money to deal with these people both for the analysis and because you have to ban them.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you deal with the wallhackers though? That's what I wanna know.
I always thought the way the Knight moves is weird. Now I know why.
Re:I don't know (Score:5, Informative)
The simple fact of the matter is that Carlsen may have lost fair and square and could not deal with that.
That doesn't square with his history--Carlsen doesn't lose often, but he does, indeed lose... and doesn't have a history of meltdowns when he does.
Re: (Score:2)
So? There is a first for everything.
Re: (Score:2)
Play games in a Faraday cage. Metal detector to enter.
Nothing that can be sneaked through that has enough processing power to be of any help, and the Faraday cage prevents reception of radio signals.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of these things are televised, so technology has to come through and doing better than humans in chess is not a very hard problem to solve anymore. A Raspberry Pi Zero could do something like predict 10-20 moves in 30 seconds. Unless this is blitz chess, you could probably get an Arduino to do it in the minutes-hours of thinking time.
Re: (Score:2)
A raspi zero is pretty small, but a complete device with a battery is pretty easy to find. You'd pick the device up easily with a wand, and while it's not outside the realm of possibility to shove it up your arsehole, how are you going to communicate with it? Sphincter clenches? That's going to be inconvenient.
Re: (Score:3)
Please, for the group, explain a single cheating method that could reasonably be accomplished if the ternament was done with a separated audience (1-way window or video) and a time delay?
If you tell me the person learns morse code to communicate through butt clenches to a wifi enabled butt plug, i'm going to laugh at you.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If you tell me the person learns morse code to communicate through butt clenches to a wifi enabled butt plug, i'm going to laugh at you.
Well, since you mention it. One of the ways I heard some one was cheating was with bluetooth enabled anal-beads. I don't know if this is true and I'm refusing to look it up, well, just because. Nor do I know how practical this method is but I'm willing to give them an 'A' for effort.
An another note, I wasn't even aware they made bluetooth anal-beads.
Re: (Score:3)
One of the ways I heard some one was cheating was with bluetooth enabled anal-beads. I don't know if this is true
It's not true.
Re:I don't know (Score:5, Interesting)
One of the ways I heard some one was cheating was with bluetooth enabled anal-beads.
This was a joke somebody made, and the internet cyberbullies have converted it into an actual hypothesis.
What they didn't stop to think about is this: With delayed broadcast, how does the bluetooth know what moves have been made?
And did you know that it is easy to detect bluetooth radio transmissions?
When you see them wanding players before the games, did you know it isn't a metal detector, it is a radio emissions and coil detector? Eg, bug detection?
Re: (Score:3)
I'm kind of sad this was just a joke. It is just one of those stories you want to be true.
Yes, I know it easy to detect bluetooth transmissions and I'm sure its not the first time someone has tried to cheat with a radio device.
Still, anal-beads.
Re: (Score:2)
You ask the wrong question. A _known_ cheating technique or one we could come up with here is pretty worthless. Does in no way exclude the existence of numerous ones though.
Re: (Score:2)
Moreover - whatever is being spent on anti-cheating detection for a tournament is probably a lot more expensive than the plane tickets to just get people together in the same space and do it in person, so it makes no logistical sense to invest in it.
Re: (Score:2)
One thing is certain: anti-cheating detection methods are all getting an upgrade in the near future.
Probably not. Anti-cheating is basically an impossible task when players are relatively closely matched, as that is the case here. You cannot rely on any technological detection method, as there are just too many possibilities and you would need to think of all of them. You can also not rely on players suddenly exhibiting skills far above their level.
The simple fact of the matter is that Carlsen may have lost fair and square and could not deal with that. Or that Niemann cheated in a way that is impossible to detect at this time.
Maybe, but holding the match in a Faraday cage to block any remotely operated cheating aids would be a good start.
And nude.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe, but holding the match in a Faraday cage to block any remotely operated cheating aids would be a good start.
And nude.
And with a full MRI scan before and after each match. And cremating the players after each match and sifting through the ashes.
Re:I don't know (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Well *right after Carlsen withdrew from the tournament* they instituted a 15-minute delay of broadcast and better signal checking and Niemann didn't win any games the rest of the tournament. Don't ask me why that can't just be stated instead of vague "nothing has been proven" statements.
The 15 minute delay seems like a requirement right now. There's always hidden cameras... but it makes things a lot harder.
As for Niemann losing the games after the delay was instituted (I couldn't find a source to back that up). Although I suspect Carlsen is in the right here, even if Niemann was innocent I'd still expect him to lose after the incidents just from the loss of focus due to the controversy.
Re: (Score:2)
As for Niemann losing the games after the delay was instituted
He didn't. He drew most of them. Search for "Sinquefield cup". You may need to correct my spelling.
Re:I don't know (Score:5, Interesting)
As for Niemann losing the games after the delay was instituted
He didn't. He drew most of them. Search for "Sinquefield cup". You may need to correct my spelling.
Actually, OP didn't say he lost them. He said "Niemann didn't win any games". Funny how wording accidentally gets twisted so easily.
Re: (Score:3)
Funny how someone managing to draw every game is still somewhat impressive, while losing is not, But had the OP actually said that, he couldn't imply to those less familiar with chess that he had lost them.
Re: (Score:2)
Well *right after Carlsen withdrew from the tournament* they instituted a 15-minute delay...
The 15 minute delay seems like a requirement right now.
In order to avoid things like this, perhaps the 15 minute delay should have been mandated across all OTB chess tournaments, long ago.
There's always hidden cameras... but it makes things a lot harder.
No, what makes things a lot harder, is suggesting camera play. Why is there even the remote possibility of hidden cameras? We have known how to sweep, scan, and monitor people and rooms for electronic eavesdropping for decades now.
If OTB fans are truly fans, they'll subject themselves to whatever it takes to watch in person. Meaning whatever it takes to secure the damn roo
Re: (Score:2)
As for Niemann losing the games after the delay was instituted (I couldn't find a source to back that up).
2022 Sinquefield Cup [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it a major tournament attended by top chess pros? How is it possible that sources on this don't exist?
Exactly this. I don't know exactly where to go for the games (chess.com probably has them) but Gotham Chess, a popular YouTuber, has been doing recaps on his channel for the duration of the tournament. The actual games should be very easy to find.
These games are going to get entered into every games database and become part of chess history, even if they were not particularly interesting or significant. Games in chess tournaments become like sports stats. They are recorded, archived, saved, become statistic
Re: (Score:2)
I would have thought a wide range RF spectrum analyser would find cheats pretty quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
I would have thought a wide range RF spectrum analyser would find cheats pretty quickly.
That's what they wand them with before the game
Re:I don't know (Score:4)
Well *right after Carlsen withdrew from the tournament* they instituted a 15-minute delay of broadcast and better signal checking and Niemann didn't win any games the rest of the tournament. Don't ask me why that can't just be stated instead of vague "nothing has been proven" statements.
A word to the wise: lawsuit. Any specific accusations would risk legal action for defamation - which can reap rich rewards indeed.
Re: (Score:2)
Worse is that these idiots are making accusations based on secret evidence. "Carlsen must know something, and it must be really bad for Dlugy" when that's what people take away from his statement, and he doesn't correct the record, it also proves that a person would believe that after listening to his statement. The people making these statements don't understand at all; saying things that harms a person's career is the problem. It has nothing to do with "direct accusations." It has to do with knowing it wo
Re: (Score:2)
and Niemann didn't win any games the rest of the tournament
This is blatant horse shit
Re: (Score:2)
Play naked in a sealed room with the game broadcast on a time delay.
Re: (Score:2)
They used to do that at the Olympics, in ancient times. Events were done nude to prevent cheating. There was still cheating though.
Re: (Score:2)
There was still cheating though.
Was there?
Re:I don't know (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I don't know (Score:4)
Niemann has been caught and admitted to cheating in the past. Multiple times.
https://nypost.com/2022/09/07/... [nypost.com]
https://thesportsgrail.com/wat... [thesportsgrail.com]
Chess.com says they have evidence of continued cheating and he has been banned by chess.com. Of course he's still cheating, once a cheat, always a cheat. He should have been banned from all competition a long ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Chess.com says they have evidence of continued cheating and he has been banned by chess.com.
They say they have secret evidence that makes him look bad, but they didn't say what the evidence is or what it actually shows.
This demonstrates a profound lack of quality legal advice on their part. Even if the evidence is as you suspect, of cheating, they're still improperly defaming him by using secret evidence to do it.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't imagine how you can fit so many logical fallacies into a single post.
He resigned an *online game* (Score:5, Informative)
Re:He resigned an *online game* (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not really that strange getting a(nother) ban now. After all, kill two people this afternoon, and get caught for one murder. If you're ever released the other would still be of interest to police.
I don't think it's possible to condone cheating actions: it's "just" online points, true, but it's also more than that. Inflate your standing in any environment and you're pushing someone out of the way. Profit - even if small amounts - from cheating and you're denying someone else money. You might even deny t
Re: (Score:2)
It's not really that strange getting a(nother) ban now.
It is strange because he was already punished for it, he even had an in-person meeting with the chess com CEO in Florida afterwards where they agreed it was water under the bridge.
Re:He resigned an *online game* (Score:5, Insightful)
Or if he dislikes that Hans also admitted to cheating online 3 years ago in 'for fun' online games so that he could increase his rating in order to play against the top competition
And once a cheater (who clearly isn't as good as their rating) reaches that Magnus/Hikaru level, what exactly is the goal then? Losing your ass off 'for fun'? Is there THAT much notariety in playing these players to simply lose over and over again?
If you're actually good enough to play against the 'top competition', then you will get there. If you're that good, you would also have zero reason to cheat against low level GMs. Even 'for fun'. You would simply...beat them.
If you're not that good and like winning, then you're probably not going to stop doing whatever it is that got you there.
Re: (Score:2)
You get better by playing people better than you. At least, that's what some people believe, including Hans.
A lot of people in the chess world have that idea, so they give tournament invites to younger rising players, even though they know those players will probably lose. The point is to help them get experience.
Re: He resigned an *online game* (Score:2)
Can't anyone just play a computer if they want practice against someone better than them?
Re: (Score:2)
I feel the answer is yes.
However, top humans do play differently than computers. They have a lot of internal rules to simplify things, like the rule of the square [youtube.com] or knight leads the way, king saves the day [youtube.com]. Naroditsky says that a good heuristic is to go for static advantages, not dynamic advantages. When you play against another human, you can ask yourself, "How did he do that??" and come up with an answer. That is how you learn. When you play against a computer, it will do things by simply calculating fas
Re: He resigned an *online game* (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Impossible. He's still working on his story.
The timing of Niemann's ban was suspicious as hell, but I doubt anyone would have noticed before Carlsen's little tantrum called attention to it.
Now we're forced to wonder if his little resignation stunt wasn't just him running away like frightened chipmunk because he was too rattled by this whole mess to play well enough to even have a chance.
If Carlsen was a politician, I'd fully expect him to get caught in a far worse cheating scandal in an airport restroom...
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it's that suspicious. It's public knowledge that chess.com is buying Magnus's companies, so he stands to make money from the acquisition. That process might give access to info that chess.com has but he didn't previously.
Ben Finegold posted a YouTube video recently where he's suggested that if you were to saying a GM is suspected of cheating, he'd think of Hans.
We don't know anything because not all information is public. For now, everything is speculation.
Re: He resigned an *online game* (Score:4)
Given Carlsen's antics, and the massive conflict of interest, I'm going to give Niemann the benefit of the doubt here. They've been trying to smear Hans for a poor decision he made when he was a prepubescent child. It's like branding someone who swiped a bit of pick-n-mix when they were a kid as a thief for the rest of their life.
This looks a lot more like Carlsen abusing his position than it does like Neimann cheating. An accusation, I should point out, Carlsen made without a shred of evidence. We have no reason to trust him or, by extension, chess.com.
Re: (Score:2)
The game Carlsen resigned was an online game against Niemann who had just been banned from chess.com days before for cheating in online matches over the last years, which he admitted to though maybe not to the extent that chess.com says they have evidence of. The real question here is what is wrong with the organizer for going ahead with the previously scheduled online match after Niemann was banned by chess.com? This really appears to be Carlson taking a strong stand against cheating and the press totally misunderstanding it because they can't keep track of the facts. source [theguardian.com]
Plus it's just that nobody wants to hear the obvious, most likely story: punk kid cheated, gets called out on it.
That's just dog bites man, boring, nobody wants to hear it.
Cheating is assumed (Score:2)
Cheating is assumed if a player exceeds their reach. The problem? It's wrong. It's always been wrong. But now, every game is over analyzed and every move is rated.
Exceed your rating, you "must" be cheating.
Re: (Score:2)
Inexplicably exceed your rating, then you are cheating.
Re: (Score:2)
How would one explicably exceed their rating?
Re: (Score:3)
How would one explicably exceed their rating?
By improving your skill. Eventually your rating will increase to match your improved skill.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but how quickly or slowly would you expect that to happen? Are there thresholds?
If player A improves to a certain level in five years, and player B does it in two, do you assume player B is cheating?
What if someone has talent, or has a breakthrough and suddenly jumps up in the charts?
Re: (Score:2)
It happened to one player, Alireza Firouzja. His account on chess.com got flagged for cheating, but then it turned out he was just really good. Details of how that was determined were not released.
In another case, a guy was using a earpiece to cheat in tournaments. He claimed innocence, so they allowed him a chance to demonstrate his skill. They took him to another room, gave him some chess problems, and asked him to solve him. The problems were far below his rating level, but he couldn't solve them.
Anothe
Re: (Score:2)
Magnus never denigrated Alireza, in fact I remember a lichess online blitz where he said he was proud of having won a game against one of the best players of the next generation. He also calls Penguin (Andrew Tang) a serious blitz opponent - maybe he isn't better at chess than Carlssen but he certainly can play faster. I don't think Magnus has any issues with younger players being good at the game.
Edmund
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know why you were replying to me.
Re: (Score:3)
It gives us extra background to your comment and allows us to understand that earlier comments denigrating Magnus C. are likely slanderous without pointing at any particular one. They're just comments, not always criticism or rebuttal. We're not always the most sensitive crew to remember to say things like "great comment" before we launch into our tirades. This is where people get accused of "mansplaining" when actually they were just ranting off with no real thought of the other person at all.
Anyway. Great
Re:Cheating is assumed (Score:4)
There is a real problem and that is that these days people memorize irrational moves that can only be predicted by a computer. I think that is what Hans will claim and Magnus will dispute is possible. Kasparov had the same beef with Magnus since Magnus trained on computers, he had an advantage that could not be learned, but Magnus' computer simulations in the early 2000s weren't advanced enough.
Basically chess is a completely solved game at this point, it is an advanced version of tic-tac-toe, you'll see more and more people with memorization capability over actual skill, the era of Magnus and Kasparov is over.
Re: (Score:2)
This is quite wrong and is an argument no-one would make who plays chess at a reasonably high level.
There is scope for memorization, particularly in opening theory and in endgame technique. There is also some value to having deliberatelyy learned typical tactical patterns, because it helps you see them over the board in different positions.
But no, the possibilities in a game are so numerous that no amount of memorization is going to get a win in that specific game. In every game you will always (except fo
Re: (Score:2)
I believe IBM claimed a few years ago claimed to have solved it with a few hundreds of terabytes of storage. You don't need all the possible chess board positions, just the 10^45 that are feasible and you can even pare that down significantly for high level chess to those that give you greater chance of winning.
I don't think you need to remember all possible moves, you need to memorize certain patterns and progressions, and many in chess already do this, my point was that the computer makes moves that are d
Re: (Score:2)
Basically chess is a completely solved game at this point,
It's not in the sense that someone could still create a better computer engine (or algorithm) that beats our current computer engines. This likely will happen.
Interestingly, I detect a trend among top players to move away from the "safe" style that has dominated for the last 20 years, and into a more dynamic, complex style where ability to calculate and understand distant positions will matter much more.
No Comment (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
He's introducing a new piece in the game of chess: the drama queen.
Re: (Score:3)
He's introducing a new piece in the game of chess: the drama queen.
This isn't new. Nor is it particularly interesting.
Having sat across the board from 3 chess masters (two of whom are now grand masters) let me state this for the record:
These people are strange. With massive IQs and the ability to focus on things that are both complex and mundane they create a lot of ego (and ID) withing their small community.
The drama is not new. Look at the level of mental instability in champion grand masters through history. They are nuts. And the only people who can match their intelle
Re: (Score:2)
These people are strange. With massive IQs and the ability to focus
They don't have massive IQs. They do have the ability to focus.
Re: (Score:2)
With massive IQs
I'm only Expert rated, not Master, but 100% of the masters I know are complete idiots on any and every non-chess subject with the exception of math. They're often good at actually doing math, some are accountants in their day jobs. But when it comes to the philosophy of math, or science, they're just complete idiots. They don't even understand where math comes from, that it is a human tool. Most even think that the laws of nature are implemented by some sort of internal clockwork that does math, even though
Re: (Score:2)
"Unfortunately I cannot particularly speak on that,"
"I will not comment on that,"
"No, I will not say more about that subject."
I think you better change that headline.
But Carlsen lost due to a blunder... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
But the loss was due to his own major blunder early in the game.
And a blunder late in the game. It was a few mistakes by Magnus.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, his opponent made several mistakes too, so he probably needs a better computer engine.
If u r da coach of some1 who beats the World Champ (Score:2)
Niemann is a cheater. He admitted it. (Score:2, Insightful)
Cheaters can't be allowed to play, especially not competitively. End of story.
Re: (Score:2)
He was 12.
Re: (Score:2)
That leaves him enough time to pursue a different profession.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He could make cheese.
Re: (Score:2)
No. Let's play Global Thermonuclear War.
Proof? (Score:5, Insightful)
but no one has been able to prove this, nor has a mechanism for the supposed cheating been proven.
When making any kind of accusation you should present some evidence or shut up. If this guy cheated, where is the evidence? All I have seen so far is a protracted process of this Niemann guy's name being dragged through the mud without any proof. Nothing but:
... But, you know, people can draw their own conclusion and they certainly have ... I will not comment on that ... No, I will not say more about that subject "
“Unfortunately I cannot particularly speak on that
If his accuser has proof then Niemann’s accuser should present it instead of feeding everybody this steady trickle of nebulous insinuations and if he fails to do so Niemann should sue his ass for libel.
Re: (Score:2)
Gee, it's almost as though the risk of a lawsuit might cause someone to be careful and timid in how they word things, lol
Re: (Score:2)
Gee, it's almost as though the risk of a lawsuit might cause someone to be careful and timid in how they word things, lol
Well, if you don't watch your mouth, accuse somebody of cheating and don't have any proof you have nobody but yourself to blame for getting sued, and unless this guy ponies up some proof he is going to get his ass sued off.
Re: (Score:2)
the only people making accusations are the media and other randos on the internet, Magnus has made no such accusation.
hes not trickling nebulous information, he resigned from a tournament for unknown reasons and the media ran with it and created a narrative just like they always do.
Then he should have cleared things up long ago with a short and poignant press statement detailing why he resigned instead of prolonging this media circus with nebulous comments like:
... But, you know, people can draw their own conclusion and they certainly have ... I will not comment on that ... No, I will not say more about that subject "
... for exampl
“Unfortunately I cannot particularly speak on that
If he really resigned from that tournament for a reason other than Niemann cheating, maybe,
Faraday cage (Score:2)
Would there be any difficulty in playing in-person games in a Faraday cage?
Best wishes,
Bob
Re: (Score:2)
Gotta block the analog hole too. If someone/something can view the board and send that info to outside the Faraday cage, then we're back where we started.
Re: (Score:2)
Faraday cages are expensive, and players will need to take bathroom breaks. Those are the difficulties.
Also in my experience, they don't have great ventilation, but YMMV.
Chess is no longer a "game". (Score:2)
As our understanding and tools for problem-solving have improved, things that were once the skills of the elite or the games of kings are now something your phone can do better. Things that once required talent, skills, and execution, and were fun for the players... are now rote memorization and if there's too much to remember... use your tools to do it.
Chess, like many other games before it, have been changed from a "game" to a gamble. Tic-tac-toe to a child is a difficult "game". To an adult you can h
"I can't speak on that"? (Score:2)
So, he makes a very public move, and then says he can't talk about it? I would think he would *want* to tell everyone he could about what was behind his withdrawal. What's the point of making a statement, if you don't want to make a statement? I'm confused.
This drama overshadows chess (Score:2)
Niemann is a 19 year old kid. He's not equipped to handle this kind of pressure mentally. And name dropping his mentor is just adding fuel
Journalism Decoder Ring (Score:2)
Someone speaks authoritatively on a subject because they are an expert == That person is full of themselves
Someone refuses to answer questions about something controversial == That person is "sowing chaos"
Remember, never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
Who's read Iain M. Banks The Player of Games? (Score:2)
Way too easy to inadvertently post a serious spoiler, but I hope it's OK to post one of the smallest by saying something relevant happens early on in the story.
Lol, now I want to reread that! I'm currently going through Use of Weapons again.
What a loss, that he's gone now.
Perfect moves (Score:2)
I just watched a game where all of Carlsen's moves after a certain point were exactly the best moves according to engines, allowing him to win what appeared to be a losing position. In a rapid game. It's pretty clear that Carlsen must be cheating.
Re: (Score:2)
Magnus Carlsen has cheated more than once, here is the proof. The first video is during a tournament.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
I had to... (Score:2)
...look it up, because I'm not a chess aficionado, but it's MAXIM not "Maxine Dlugy". Maxine is a woman's name.
Most English speaking Americans only speak a single language, and therefore have no clue about the use of genders in other languages, and it really shows when asinine mistakes like this are made. It took me all of 15 seconds to look up the guy's credentials. Vice paid somebody to not bother.
https://www.chessmaxacademy.co... [chessmaxacademy.com]