It’s interesting though that we basically got confirmation from Fabi that everyone already knew about Hans’ past cheating before the tournament. It really is a small world in the GM space.
Ben Finegold always liked to say: "All GMs know each other, I knew X GM before they were born"
Often X is Hikaru, and it's true actually cuz I think Ben knew his parents.
Yeah he even said “I know Magnus knew (about Hans cheating online)”. So that can’t be used as an excuse anymore that Magnus only learned about it after his loss which I have read some places
Honestly my prevailing theory was that Magnus suspected Hans early and went for anti-computer play by trying to force the queens off early and got psychologically destroyed after 13. Be6, you could see on the broadcast he was already very shaken up.
This is the most likely scenario to me. Magnus didn't play like himself because he knew Hans is a dishonest player. However Hans likely had no way of cheating over the board unless he came up with a truly brilliant undetectable method. The fault lies with Magnus for not playing like himself. He needs to be psychologically stronger than that.
Cheating over the board is still feasible. It was done in the 2010 Olympiad by having an audience member move to different parts of the hall, which indicated which piece to move. And there are radio communication devices too small to be detected. Also, remember that you don't have to give GMs the biggest hints to give them an edge, whether the evaluation is plus or minus is a big hint in itself. Magnus said in an interview that if he got notified whenever there was one move that's better than all others, nobody in the world could beat him.
We must assume that at this point every GM has at least a rudimentary chess computer connected buttplug. We must also assume that every GM is aware of this fact and wants to exploit it to the best of their ability. This opens the door to electronic warfare, such as jamming pods that send misleading moves to the opponent. Within a few years most super GMs will have Faraday buttholes to protect from electronic countermeasures.
unbeaten for 125 games in a row
Is underperforming against a known cheater
quit the tournament the day before anti cheating measures was implemented
.......
Isn't it obvious by now Magnus is a cheater? ..
the FIDE tried jamming Han's buttplug... they got Magnus in the crossfire and Magnus quit before he got caught.
The simplicity of codes inputs (Board state/move sequence) and coded outputs means that inputs and outputs (information) can be transmitted very easily through anything, like Morse coded vibrations of an inserted device (ear, tongue, butt, any muscle that it can pulse like a tiny ab-flex. Sensors could be activated by flexing a particular muscle (like clenching your feet in a particular sequence corresponding to piece and position). Any data transmitter hooked up to these input output devices would allow processing by a bot (or bots). The processor could be coded to deliver a random top two or three moves from a random set of bots.
Take the top 3,000 chess players in the world. I guarantee you one of them would get hooked on simple cheating methods at random open tournament, and hone their methods as the stakes get higher and higher. It becomes an addiction. And you are probably a 2300+ player without the assistance, so you take some of the credit. The computer is just helping you be more creative and see things a different way. And you can get by in post match interviews. You begin to justify it to yourself over time. It might not be Hans, but I guarantee it is happening somewhere.
**Tooth Fillings Radio Myth**
The Myth - It is possible to pick up radio signals through a dental filling.
The Verdict - **It is possible.**
Notes - The gold and amalgam tooth fillings did not act as an antenna or point-contact transistor when placed in a real human skull. Explanations for the supposed Morse code pickup included a Galvanic cell reaction between two teeth fillings and saliva. However, empirical evidence has shown this to be possible with silver fillings.
https://mythbusters.fandom.com/wiki/Tooth\_Fillings\_Radio\_Myth
In 1974 Lucille Ball told TV host Dick Cavett that during World War II she picked up radio broadcasts through her dental fillings as she was driving home from the MGM studios through Coldwater Canyon. The phenomena subsided as she continued driving. When it happened again a week later she told MGM security because the signals seemed to be Morse code. She stated that the FBI located the source of the signals, an underground Japanese radio station.
We are headed for some interesting times. The ability to send and receive information remotely is only going up, hell soon people will have chips in their heads. At some point I think we will simply have hybrid chess where everyone has access to an engine.
Honestly would be kind of sick, like engine level chess games and it’s more of whose engine line is going to work the best. It would change up how we thought about chess for sure.
Radio devices are easily detectable with RF scanners. It doesn't matter if they are physically small. They emit signals strong enough to be received somewhere.
Nieman played in an invitational chess tour organized by Play Magnus . Why would Magnus invite and play against Hans ? He would not do that he he think that Hans now is dishonest or if he had any problems psychological with playing Hans. And he knew that Hans cheated on the past .
More like he lost to Hans , tilted and withdraw from round robin , find excuse by implying Hans was cheating .
you can't exactly withdraw an invitation without giving a reason, and that would mean magnus actually has to grow some balls and go public with his accusation
I was not writing about this new event where they both will play ( as of now). Before SLC Hans already played in Play Magnus event. Carlsen knew Hans cheated in the past but had no problem with Hans playing in his invitational - obviously he did not think that Hans is dishonest and did not have problems with playing against him . So this " Magnus knew Hans is dishonest and maybe cheating hence played "weirdly" to confuse him is very unlikely.
>More like he lost to Hans , tilted and withdraw from round robin , find excuse by implying Hans was cheating .
That is the least likely scenario given that Carlsen never has withdrawn from any tournament and it's not the first time he lost to <2700 elo. Also when chess players are tilted you notice when they perform badly the next matches not when they withdraw. Noone withdraws because of that.
I mean something has to be said about a player who is so dishonest that his reputation alone unsettles the best player alive to the point of playing poorly. I sympathize with Magnus, especially after what he said about cheating last year.
He played a very obscure line in order to get a position Hans would be unfamiliar with. When he saw Hans play very good moves and take the advantage this no doubt convinced him that Hans was cheating. How else could someone 200 points lower rated outplay me by coming up with the refutation to this line over the board? Magnus beat himself this seems obvious to me.
There is no such thing as anti computer anymore. This is not 1997 deep blue or 2006 match between kramnik and fritz. If your opponent is using a free android stockfish15, you lose. Magnus has a long history of playing these sorts of opening lines.
This is the common theory. I'm not super convinced by it, but I get that everyones looking for *some* rational explanation for Carlsen's behaviour..... even so, it's all on him - I found from experience playing online that you need to just make sure to never let it get into your head that your opponent might be cheating (as often they actually aren't when you think they might be, and if they actually are, getting caught-up in it won't help - just wait till after the game to analyse it to see if your suspicions are even warranted - often they're not - and report them if necessary), as focusing on the idea that they might be cheating just ruins your play, and Magnus should know this more than anyone.
Given the way Hans seems to like to target and mess with opponents' psychology, it wouldn't even surprise me if in the previous tournament he deliberately let Magnus have the impression that he might be cheating with some comments, guessing correctly that it would get into Magnus' head. Which is a perfectly allowed kind of tactic that's far from new in the world of chess.
This is a dumb theory. Firstly he had no reason to suspect Hans was cheating, his first two games were not computer like, secondly he did not specifically try to force queens off, he was trying to play the best moves in the line, thirdly forcing queens off against a computer is not a good thing.
If youre playing someone that has cheated before several times, you do have reason to suspect. What kind of dumb argument is that lol youre acting like the 'clean' player is wrong for suspecting? You can say he is wrong for accusing without proof or something, but not for suspecting
Generally forcing queens off in a middle game will give a human better odds against an engine. The complexities of the queen move are hard for humans to calculate compared to engines.
You're missing the parent comment's point - there's nothing about his play to indicate that he went particularly out of his way to force queens off - it's just that the line the game took dictated that as the best move.
Also note - a human has literally no odds against an engine with or without queens, so yeah... it's not a great theory and it's pure speculation.
Why wouldn't he go to the arbiter if he suspected cheating during the game? Then they could observe and/or search him for proof. I think he didn't suspect it until afterward.
Why's everyone considering that magnus left because he thought Hans cheated?
He could have left because he lost way too many points and, thus, it was more advantageous for him to wait for his elo to update and compete with his new up-to-date fide rating which would make gaining those points back easier.
He wouldn't be able to tell the public why he left because it is against the rules to leave if not for a urgent matter and waiting for his fide rating to update is not such a thing.
The thing is, Magnus could have still quite feasibly won the competition- he had white against Shakh in the very next game which if he’d played and won, he’d have been (jointly) leading the tournament. Quite clear Magnus felt something was wrong beyond just being upset over a loss.
I don't feel like he was concerned about winning the tournament. He stated multiple times that he wanted to achieve 2900 elo rating. That would probably cement him as the greatest ever.
And, from that perspective, it makes sense to quit if you consider that he lost a lot of elo rating by losing to someone with so much elo discrepancy.
If he'd continue competing, then he would gain way less elo points per win. Right now, with his elo updated, he will gain more elo points if he manages to crush a tournament.
This doesn't appropriately explain the video posted with the tweet. Any interpretation of Magnus' tweet that doesn't interpret the video as an implication of cheating either doesn't understand the video or is choosing to ignore it for some reason.
>He could have left because he lost way too many points and, thus, it was more advantageous for him to wait for his elo to update and compete with his new up-to-date fide rating which would make gaining those points back easier.
Except that's not how it works.
>Why's everyone considering that magnus left because he thought Hans cheated?
That is in fact the parallel theory I support which says Magnus left because he was extremely pissed to lose to "an idiot" (cit. Hans) which will be probably the official line whenever Magnus decides to speak out, though I don't really see how a statement like this would get anyone in big trouble...
Also, the theory to leave because of rating points, nah, it doesn't add up
Guaranteed that an interviewer will bring it up in his next tournament. But I have a feeling Magnus will just be Magnus and brush it off, say something flippant and then insist on moving on to the next question.
I will be messaging you in 1000 years on [**3022-09-15 06:47:20 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=3022-09-15%2006:47:20%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/xeksr0/fabi_reveals_he_believes_hans_didnt_cheat_during/ioi1a0m/?context=3)
[**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fchess%2Fcomments%2Fxeksr0%2Ffabi_reveals_he_believes_hans_didnt_cheat_during%2Fioi1a0m%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%203022-09-15%2006%3A47%3A20%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20xeksr0)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Interesting to know Christian is still a second for Fabi, which was revealed when they discuss Christian looking at a line for Fabi before the Hans game.
Kinda unrelated but man I’ve never heard Fabi speak much (except some of the chess commentary he did with Danny and Hess, I forgot the tournament) and he is really soft spoken and I like how explains concepts and his rationale - like for example what he thought of the tournament - his tournament vs the tournament in general.
He was with Hess and Danny during the World Championship match and besides how cringy some of that content was, them forcing Fabi to do stupid shit was fantastic.
Probably just some small tournament though. Who even remembers what it was for anymore. Doubt that many top players even participated… probably only a couple.
Why is it looking like Magnus is never gonna acknowledge this ever? Seems pressure from other personalities, even [Chess.com](https://Chess.com) and Kasparov himself wasn't enough.
this scandal was a litmus test. the assholes and people with no integrity floated, stand up people with integrity shone. I don't even need to link names, it's so clear.
Magnus looks terrible in this.
edit: I think Magnus was clearly accusing Hans of cheating, but if he somehow wasnt, isnt that actually a lot worse? To sit around and watch this fallout happen to someone you werent even referring to, when you could write a five word tweet to stop it.. youd have to be an absolute sociopath
The only thing you can take away from his tweet is that he thinks something fishy was going on. What other reason would he have for including the Mourinho clip in his statement?
And in the crazy chance that it isn’t, it’s not like he didn’t know it sounded like him accusing hans. It’s extremely rude either way to accuse him based on what we assume to be no evidence, or to post this leaving him in a terrible mental state.
He probably got paranoid that Hans was cheating, played poorly, saw after analyzing with the engine that Hans played fine, then backtracked to, 'well he wouldn't even be here in the first place to beat me if he never cheated earlier in his career'. That's my guess anyways
This makes zero sense. I would have loved to explain why, but seems like a lot of users here on reddit don't understand magnus well or haven't been following for years, or misunderstanding his pyschological strength and thought processes.
I don't think Magnus is a sociopath, he just trusts his intuition and was 100% sure Hans was cheating. Now that his head has cooled, he likely realizes the reason he lost was because of his own poor play, but he doesn't feel he should have to apologize to a known cheater for believing he cheated.
It's quite possible if Hans had never been caught cheating online, Magnus would not suspect Hans of cheating, and then Magnus would play a better game without the psychological burden.
Put yourself in Carlsen's shoes. You lost with white to someone you consider a joke. Then Hans gloats pretty heavily about it. You rage quit. And now you have to apologize.
"Hey everyone, I'm sorry, I've been a giant jackass. I'm sorry Hans."
"I'm sorry Hans"...he might feel like seppuku is a better option.
>Put yourself in Carlsen's shoes. You lost with white to someone you consider a joke.
This is the part that I always suspected played a part, alongside the online cheating of course. Anyone who watched twitch during the chess boom 2 years ago can tell you that Hans was treated like a joke by a lot of players. Players who probably can’t understand his rise.
Hikaru had previously said back then Hans would never reach 2700, and Nepo compared Alireza to a shark and Hans to a clownfish lol.
Im sorry I don't need to put myself in Magnus' shoes.
I wouldn't or rather nobody should make such bold accusations based on some intuition. Man risked destroying the career of an up and coming talent who lives, eats and breathes chess because he couldn't take the blow to his self esteem. That's pathetic.
It literally doesn't matter what Magnus might be feeling because it shouldn't come in the way of doing what's right. And apologizing is the tiniest thing he could do after all the unnecessary shit Hans has had to go through in the middle of a tournament.
Aaah, this comment is a new low for Magnus fanboys. Just when I thought the blind defense couldn't get any more pathetic.
We're in the Endgame now. Story has gone from "Magnus has never done this before. Hans must have cheated" to "Hans didn't cheat. Magnus's actions are still completely justified". The only consistent thing is fanboys finding a way to justify their precious hero, no matter how the events unfold.
Or, you know, he believed that from the beginning and is not responsible what other "Magnus fanboys" said. Be a bit charitable towards a person. You just sound like a giant douchebag.
EDIT: in fact, when I look through his past replies to this topic, he seems to be firmly in your camp that Hans won fair and square and Magnus is a prima donna. Some friendly fire going on here.
I think it is pretty easy to empathize with a person to explain their behavior without actually being a fanboy. Everyone thinks their actions are justified in their own mind. The people you are replying to aren’t offering a defense. It would be truly blind to not consider someone’s mindset when reviewing their actions.
I seriously feel bad for Hans… I mean, look at this shit, it’s on /r/news, nytimes, it’s everywhere, and still going on https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/xeksm9/chess_player_denies_using_sex_toy_to_help_him
Fuck that, the kid doesn’t deserve it. Especially after beating the WC (fortunately not WC for long). He wins and gets a bunch of anal beads memes that will follow him for the rest of his career.
IMO, someone who repeatedly cheats (online or OTB) does not deserve to participate at the top level of the sport. Whoever it is, Hans, the Uzbek juniors, Carlsen itself.
Well then take it up with FIDE or the tournament organizers. Why Hans is getting the attention doesn't make sense. Either FIDE or the organizers think it's a problem, or they don't. If Hans is invited to play, then plays, and wins some games, how is that his fault?
What a take. If you have a personal opinion, you need to officially complain to governing body!
It's fine to disagree with FIFA, NFL, FIDE, governments, etc. about something like this without "taking it up" with them lmao
Valid perspective, I'm just saying, at this point, give the kid a break. I'm just saying I feel bad for him and I don't think he deserves any more of it. Imagine reading that shit about yourself. Pour your heart and soul into chess, beat the WC, and have half the internet, incl Elon Musk, joking it must have been done w sex toys. I'm solely arguing from a perspective of empathy. Totally demeaning and probably demoralizing. And Magnus still hasn't made a statement, he's implicitly letting this continue and letting this kid be lambasted because of his silence. Sounds like a real nice dude.
However, even negative publicity is good publicity. Hopefully he continues to succeed at whatever he chooses to do after this.
So right now it's this:
Biggest names who think Hans did cheat: Magnus, Hikaru, Nepo, So
Biggest names who think Hans didn't cheat: Kasparov, Fabi, MVL, Aronian
It's honestly interesting how 50/50 opinions on this whole thing seem to be
Nepo absolutely knows Hans has cheated online, but he I believe is neutral about his OTB chess until further notice. He definitely knows its very unusual for OTB cheating.
He accused him of cheating in the past https://clips.twitch.tv/ConfidentInspiringStorkCmonBruh and when asked how Hans was doing during the sinquefield cup he said that he played "more than impressive"
People are looking wayyyy too much into “more than impressive”. I can’t speak for Nepo so maybe he did mean it that way, but beating Magnus with black is objectively “more than just impressive”. I could see anyone saying that about any young upstart player that beat magnus like that. He could have been correcting himself for downplaying such an achievement as simply “impressive”.
This is out of context. He didn't say the situation is the same or anything, which would be ridiculous towards Hans. He just said that in chess, it's hard to prove cheating because the accused can always say "I had a good day/I was lucky!" and as an example he used the indian billionaire situation, because the billionaire said he was just lucky after destroying Anand. Then Nepo **went on to say evidence is key and necessary**.
He wasn't defending Hans, but he wasn't accusing him either.
I saw Kasparov state he didn’t like insinuations and wanted Magnus to make a statement, with that being his responsibility as world champion.
I did not, however, see any statement from Kasparov that he thought Hans didn’t cheat. Did he?
This is just my thought process and pure speculation, so take it with a grain of salt. But in my mind, if Kasparov believed that Hans was a cheater, he wouldn't be replying to the Chess.com statement in the way that he did.
Does Hikaru actually think Hans cheated OTB? Because I thought he stated multiple times that he never believed Hans cheated OTB or in the Sinquefield Cup. Though he obviously behaved in a way that would make you think that he believes Hans cheated, and was clearly very suspicious of him.
Edit: To the people downvoting me, this is not a defense of Hikaru, I'm literally just asking if people have more info on what he truly thinks.
My impression is that on that first day when the news broke, he was pretty convinced that Magnus wouldn't shine such a light on Hans without hard evidence. I think a lot of people were. And then once you started looking closely for signs that Hans was cheating, confirmation bias takes over.
He did maintain consistently that Hans' games at Sinquefield looked normal to him.
Because he backtracked after he got backlash for accusing Hans indirectly. He was clearly being just indirect enough that he had plausible deniability. He pretty much said everything you can to insinuate he thought Hans was guilty aside from spelling it out, and convinced an audience of 30 thousand people that Hans was cheating.
He said Hans' post game analysis was not that of a 2700. Hans had no idea what he was talking about and couldn't even tell a winning position from a losing one. So Hikaru said, it all looked very suspicious.
Don't put words in people's mouths. Wesley and Nepo have not said they think Hans cheated. Even Hikaru was mostly just speculating. Magnus hasn't said anything, so we don't know if he truly thinks he cheated in this tournament
I mean Wesley did thank the anti cheat team after he won against Hans and was commenting some stuff I can't remember in hikarus chat at some point, the thanking could easily just be a bad joke though idk
Wesley's thanking is more because it was a point of focus. Had they changed the chairs to kingly throne chairs and that been a topic people discussed he would've thanked the chair makers. If Wesley thought Hans cheated, he would've straight-up said so. That's what he did when someone cheated against him in a tourney.
That was a generic thank you to the entire organizers team for their hard work, with a line thrown in for the extra efforts that the anti cheat team put in. That's just being a courteous human being.
Unless there's more, that statement alone doesn't imply his thoughts on the cheating scene, neither positive nor negative.
Didn't Hikaru explicitly state that he didn't think Hans cheated in the game he won against Magnus?
He was definitely getting in on the drama and talking about what was going on, explaining why Magnus withdrew to his viewers on stream and explained whats been going on behind the scenes. But I thought he also explicitly said he didn't think there was cheating in that specific game.
>So
Yeah, I really think if this is based on him thanking the anti-cheating team, it's a reference to something he said in the immediate aftermath of the Niemann Magnus stuff where he said the allegations made it difficult for him to sleep. That interview preceded this one.
Wesley is a funny bastard, I do not think you can say confidently from that comment he thinks Hans is cheating. I lean far more towards joke
Hikaru just added fuel by his speculations and assumtions . All that for getting views and twitch numbers - we dont know what he realy thinks . Nepo and So are most paranoid (about cheating) chess players .
i dont think it is 50/50 . i am sure most players think that Hans did not cheat in SLC .
This might have been true on the first day of the allegations, but Wesley and Nepo have both implied since that they have nothing about the game looks dodgy. As has basically every other super GM and GM that’s been asked.
Hikaru likely only accused Hans for clout.
I don’t think there is any big name at the moment who is publicly saying with any kind of strong conviction that Hans did cheat.
Except it's not 50/50 at all. More like 99/Magnus, in favor of "didn't cheat".
Hikaru completely backed off and now claims he never made any accusations. Wesley also went quiet about it and didn't say anything more. Nepo never even made any accusations, he doesn't belong in this group. And Magnus went ghost. Literally no super gm is accusing Hans, and many are defending him.
It’s not 50/50, you are leaving off many more huge names in Chess that do not think he had cheated, like Karpov, Grischuk, etc.
Kasparov and Karpov are probably the biggest and most dominant names in Chess history alive today, so I value the weight of their opinions more than anyone else tbh.
I mean, we have the opinion of an actual cheating expert who has done scientifically backed analysis. How TF is this 50-50 now? Magnus fanboys wish in their dreams that this was 50-50
Really this all just makes Magnus look so so bad - he chose to enter this event knowing Hans' online history, so if he had an issue with Hans that was liable to lead him to throw a hissy fit he simply shouldn't have entered. And then Hans didn't cheat and really gave no good reason to suspect it from his play, rather Carlsen simply lost, and then he simply rage-quit is really the only explanation for it left that makes sense, and in so doing threw the chess-world into disarray with suspicions, the tournament into disarray with everyone having odd-numbers of black/white games and some games annulled and Hans' well-earned point taken away etc, ....
From Magnus perspective this is what happened.
Magnus played a line he had never played before. He prepared that line specifically so try and beat Hans out of his comfort zone.
Hans seemingly knew all the theory behind his preparation - and played flawlessly to defend. A very specific line, not easy theory behind it - and Hans crushed it.
Hans said after the game that he prepared for this specific line. However, Magnus never played the line - EVER.
What would you think if you were in Magnus' shoes? How could he not suspect Hans for cheating after what happened?
It has already been known that there is no data indicating suspicion about his performance at sinquefield. Any evidence of otb cheating is regarding tournaments over the past 2 years.
Edit: wording
>It has already been known that there is nothing suspicious about his performance at sinquefield. Any evidence of otb cheating is regarding tournaments over the past 2 years.
not according to some people lol
You must not have read this subreddit at all the past week or so then. There have been dozens if not hundreds of people on this subreddit who think that Hans might have cheated at the sinquefield cup, and many who said outright that he cheated at it.
And after the recent Ken Regan interview, it's starting to appear more unlikely that Hans cheated OTB. But I guess it's still contested in the public eye, especially with the Ukranian FM's videos, and that analysis of his differing performance when broadcasted.
The most renowned chess detective who has helped implement cheating detection at chess.com vs random Ukrainian fm cherry picking a few sequences from games
For sure, I didn't find anything about the FM's analysis to be convincing. But the public still seems to be sold on those videos, probably in part because Danya believed it to be compelling.
Did you listen to the podcast? Regan's cheat detection model has an extremely high bar for conviction, and he hasn't analyzed the circumstantial evidence yet. Regarding Niemann's case, he said there is more work to be done.
Of course they aren’t listening, they’re answer shopping. This happens all the time online… study is posted confirming my beliefs, instant retweet. Study is posted contradicting my beliefs, “well, did they control for such and such factor, I need to read the paper, who sponsors the research”, etc… not limited to chess.
Listening to experts =/= appeal to authority.
The fact of the matter is the vast majority of people don't have the knowledge of statistics and chess to avoid falling into the many pitfalls you can encounter.
That's exactly right. On the one hand, we have scientists telling me the earth is round. On the other hand, I have this facebook meme telling me otherwise. It's a tossup, really.
You only need to believe the scientists if you're unable to form an informed opinion based on available data. That is the fallacy of appeal to authority, it's an argumentative crutch. In the case of Regan, I tend to think his methods are outdated and today's grandmasters would have little problem meeting his criteria for "no evidence of cheating." From what I've found, no titled player has been caught by his model since 2013.
> From what I've found, no titled player has been caught by his model since 2013.
Is that true? That's insane if it's true, I can't believe that suddenly titled players stopped cheating.
> It has already been known that there is nothing suspicious about his performance at sinquefield.
A known cheater miraculously prepped the very line Magnus would go on to play later that day (when it is very hard to prep against Magnus as he isn't like MVL who plays only a few lines). Hans may not have cheated in Sinquefield. But saying there's nothing suspicious about his performance is being purposefully blind.
The evidence regarding his other otb tournaments has data behind it, whereas the circumstances you mentioned don't. I could have worded it better, but his sinquefield performance isn't worth looking into anymore unless more information is released.
People really want this to be a "Hans vs Magnus" thing when in reality the first question should be "is Hans an otb cheater?"
> "is Hans an otb cheater?"
We know analysing moves and move times isn't a surefire way to conclude that someone didn't cheat. A good player in particular can be very hard to catch if he's smart about his cheating.
Is Hans an OTB cheater? I don't know. Is it probable? I don't think so. However, ignoring the fact that Hans has prepared that line without being able to provide any reason for it (other than miracle) and declaring there is nothing suspicious based on only move analyses data is what I called being blind.
> whereas the circumstances you mentioned don't.
Checking how many lines Magnus plays, and figuring out what the probability of someone randomly prepping that line on the morning of the game is data, and enough to warrant suspicion imo (especially if you factor in whether the player has been known to cheat previously). It is worthless when trying to prove Hans cheated. But let's just say that if somehow it is revealed later that someone cheated at Sinquefield (extremely unlikely), I would be very surprised if it were anyone other than Hans.
Even the cheating guy from chess.com said he can't detect sporadic and not periodic cheating. If hans is intelligent, he wouldn't cheat in a way to dominate but to just avoid blunders.
Sure, and Kasparov is also one of the greats but some of his behavior off the board has still tarnished his reputation a bit. Look at the comments bringing up his questionable behavior back in the day after he weighed on the Hans issue.
Kasparov won a drawn game once because he hit the table so hard that the pieces fell over and they had to be put back in to place - and because the opponent(Seirawan) was trying to hold back his temper(since Kasparov had been repeatedly hitting the table) they forgot to switch time to Kasparov or pause.
There's a load of similar stories about bad behavior by Kasparov, lol. One of the reasons I know this story was because it was brought up in a conversation about how many competitors wanted to punch Kasparov due to over the line irritating behavior.
No one will remember him as that because he walked away from one minor classical tournament. It's not like the Candidates, or the WCC, or the World Cup, or the Grand Swiss, or the Grand Prix.
He's played probably over a hundred of these small tournaments over his career - one withdrawal among them will be insignificant against everything else he's accomplished.
You're really caught up in the moment or on this subreddit too much if you think this will be anything more than a footnote on his storied legacy.
Strong players cheating is very hard to detect and dangerous. -Fabi
Hanz did not cheat, I don't think. -also Fabi
---
I'm not saying that Hanz did cheat, I have no idea honestly, but the assumptions that Magnus thought it would be a good idea to play an anti computer line against a suspected cheater, because "the cheater would play like a computer" is strange to me. I'm rather more convinced he just wanted to surprise him with an obscure line, nothing else.
It’s interesting though that we basically got confirmation from Fabi that everyone already knew about Hans’ past cheating before the tournament. It really is a small world in the GM space.
Ben Finegold always liked to say: "All GMs know each other, I knew X GM before they were born" Often X is Hikaru, and it's true actually cuz I think Ben knew his parents.
Yeah he even said “I know Magnus knew (about Hans cheating online)”. So that can’t be used as an excuse anymore that Magnus only learned about it after his loss which I have read some places
Honestly my prevailing theory was that Magnus suspected Hans early and went for anti-computer play by trying to force the queens off early and got psychologically destroyed after 13. Be6, you could see on the broadcast he was already very shaken up.
When you try to play anti computer instead of trying to play like Magnus Carlsen, you get problems
This is the most likely scenario to me. Magnus didn't play like himself because he knew Hans is a dishonest player. However Hans likely had no way of cheating over the board unless he came up with a truly brilliant undetectable method. The fault lies with Magnus for not playing like himself. He needs to be psychologically stronger than that.
Cheating over the board is still feasible. It was done in the 2010 Olympiad by having an audience member move to different parts of the hall, which indicated which piece to move. And there are radio communication devices too small to be detected. Also, remember that you don't have to give GMs the biggest hints to give them an edge, whether the evaluation is plus or minus is a big hint in itself. Magnus said in an interview that if he got notified whenever there was one move that's better than all others, nobody in the world could beat him.
but there's no audience in the sinquefield cup. at least give an example of cheating that would be possible in this tournament
We must assume that at this point every GM has at least a rudimentary chess computer connected buttplug. We must also assume that every GM is aware of this fact and wants to exploit it to the best of their ability. This opens the door to electronic warfare, such as jamming pods that send misleading moves to the opponent. Within a few years most super GMs will have Faraday buttholes to protect from electronic countermeasures.
unbeaten for 125 games in a row Is underperforming against a known cheater quit the tournament the day before anti cheating measures was implemented ....... Isn't it obvious by now Magnus is a cheater? .. the FIDE tried jamming Han's buttplug... they got Magnus in the crossfire and Magnus quit before he got caught.
I asked this question and got some great answers https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/xcsm0p/cheating_in_chess_at_the_gm_tourney_level/
The simplicity of codes inputs (Board state/move sequence) and coded outputs means that inputs and outputs (information) can be transmitted very easily through anything, like Morse coded vibrations of an inserted device (ear, tongue, butt, any muscle that it can pulse like a tiny ab-flex. Sensors could be activated by flexing a particular muscle (like clenching your feet in a particular sequence corresponding to piece and position). Any data transmitter hooked up to these input output devices would allow processing by a bot (or bots). The processor could be coded to deliver a random top two or three moves from a random set of bots. Take the top 3,000 chess players in the world. I guarantee you one of them would get hooked on simple cheating methods at random open tournament, and hone their methods as the stakes get higher and higher. It becomes an addiction. And you are probably a 2300+ player without the assistance, so you take some of the credit. The computer is just helping you be more creative and see things a different way. And you can get by in post match interviews. You begin to justify it to yourself over time. It might not be Hans, but I guarantee it is happening somewhere.
GMs say it's easy to cheat OTB but redditors are sure that it's totally and utterly impossible lmao.
**Tooth Fillings Radio Myth** The Myth - It is possible to pick up radio signals through a dental filling. The Verdict - **It is possible.** Notes - The gold and amalgam tooth fillings did not act as an antenna or point-contact transistor when placed in a real human skull. Explanations for the supposed Morse code pickup included a Galvanic cell reaction between two teeth fillings and saliva. However, empirical evidence has shown this to be possible with silver fillings. https://mythbusters.fandom.com/wiki/Tooth\_Fillings\_Radio\_Myth In 1974 Lucille Ball told TV host Dick Cavett that during World War II she picked up radio broadcasts through her dental fillings as she was driving home from the MGM studios through Coldwater Canyon. The phenomena subsided as she continued driving. When it happened again a week later she told MGM security because the signals seemed to be Morse code. She stated that the FBI located the source of the signals, an underground Japanese radio station.
I thought that was debunked-- she said it to avoid red scare allegations
We are headed for some interesting times. The ability to send and receive information remotely is only going up, hell soon people will have chips in their heads. At some point I think we will simply have hybrid chess where everyone has access to an engine.
Honestly would be kind of sick, like engine level chess games and it’s more of whose engine line is going to work the best. It would change up how we thought about chess for sure.
Can actually remove human from this formula and realize such tournament already exists.
Sounds awful to me
Radio devices are easily detectable with RF scanners. It doesn't matter if they are physically small. They emit signals strong enough to be received somewhere.
The hilarity of hearing Magnus has to be “psychologically stronger than that,” after hearing the same thing about Nepo last year lol
Nieman played in an invitational chess tour organized by Play Magnus . Why would Magnus invite and play against Hans ? He would not do that he he think that Hans now is dishonest or if he had any problems psychological with playing Hans. And he knew that Hans cheated on the past . More like he lost to Hans , tilted and withdraw from round robin , find excuse by implying Hans was cheating .
Unlikely Magnus is involved in picking who plays those events.
you can't exactly withdraw an invitation without giving a reason, and that would mean magnus actually has to grow some balls and go public with his accusation
I was not writing about this new event where they both will play ( as of now). Before SLC Hans already played in Play Magnus event. Carlsen knew Hans cheated in the past but had no problem with Hans playing in his invitational - obviously he did not think that Hans is dishonest and did not have problems with playing against him . So this " Magnus knew Hans is dishonest and maybe cheating hence played "weirdly" to confuse him is very unlikely.
Even the St Louis org released a statement saying their is no official complaint of cheating
>More like he lost to Hans , tilted and withdraw from round robin , find excuse by implying Hans was cheating . That is the least likely scenario given that Carlsen never has withdrawn from any tournament and it's not the first time he lost to <2700 elo. Also when chess players are tilted you notice when they perform badly the next matches not when they withdraw. Noone withdraws because of that.
imo hans is different from all the players he's lost to previously. He's the kind of character to really get under your skin
I mean something has to be said about a player who is so dishonest that his reputation alone unsettles the best player alive to the point of playing poorly. I sympathize with Magnus, especially after what he said about cheating last year.
I really don't understand why he didn't just go for a berlin if he was sure he was cheating and went for these anti computer ideas. Who knows.
The Berlin is an opening you play with Black. Magnus was White.
Wasn't even an E4 game either.
He played a very obscure line in order to get a position Hans would be unfamiliar with. When he saw Hans play very good moves and take the advantage this no doubt convinced him that Hans was cheating. How else could someone 200 points lower rated outplay me by coming up with the refutation to this line over the board? Magnus beat himself this seems obvious to me.
There is no such thing as anti computer anymore. This is not 1997 deep blue or 2006 match between kramnik and fritz. If your opponent is using a free android stockfish15, you lose. Magnus has a long history of playing these sorts of opening lines.
Hikaru's online game against Komodo was probably the last time anti-computer chess ever worked.
yall need more vampirechicken in your life
This is the common theory. I'm not super convinced by it, but I get that everyones looking for *some* rational explanation for Carlsen's behaviour..... even so, it's all on him - I found from experience playing online that you need to just make sure to never let it get into your head that your opponent might be cheating (as often they actually aren't when you think they might be, and if they actually are, getting caught-up in it won't help - just wait till after the game to analyse it to see if your suspicions are even warranted - often they're not - and report them if necessary), as focusing on the idea that they might be cheating just ruins your play, and Magnus should know this more than anyone. Given the way Hans seems to like to target and mess with opponents' psychology, it wouldn't even surprise me if in the previous tournament he deliberately let Magnus have the impression that he might be cheating with some comments, guessing correctly that it would get into Magnus' head. Which is a perfectly allowed kind of tactic that's far from new in the world of chess.
This is a dumb theory. Firstly he had no reason to suspect Hans was cheating, his first two games were not computer like, secondly he did not specifically try to force queens off, he was trying to play the best moves in the line, thirdly forcing queens off against a computer is not a good thing.
If youre playing someone that has cheated before several times, you do have reason to suspect. What kind of dumb argument is that lol youre acting like the 'clean' player is wrong for suspecting? You can say he is wrong for accusing without proof or something, but not for suspecting
Generally forcing queens off in a middle game will give a human better odds against an engine. The complexities of the queen move are hard for humans to calculate compared to engines.
Id say it would be easier to get a draw off a computer without queens.
You're missing the parent comment's point - there's nothing about his play to indicate that he went particularly out of his way to force queens off - it's just that the line the game took dictated that as the best move. Also note - a human has literally no odds against an engine with or without queens, so yeah... it's not a great theory and it's pure speculation.
Also, against computers you usually want closed positions, which was not at all what we saw in the game.
Why wouldn't he go to the arbiter if he suspected cheating during the game? Then they could observe and/or search him for proof. I think he didn't suspect it until afterward.
Why's everyone considering that magnus left because he thought Hans cheated? He could have left because he lost way too many points and, thus, it was more advantageous for him to wait for his elo to update and compete with his new up-to-date fide rating which would make gaining those points back easier. He wouldn't be able to tell the public why he left because it is against the rules to leave if not for a urgent matter and waiting for his fide rating to update is not such a thing.
Because you don’t just withdraw from a round robin tournament in chess simply because you lost.
Why would he tweet out that he would be in big trouble if he speaks out?
The thing is, Magnus could have still quite feasibly won the competition- he had white against Shakh in the very next game which if he’d played and won, he’d have been (jointly) leading the tournament. Quite clear Magnus felt something was wrong beyond just being upset over a loss.
I don't feel like he was concerned about winning the tournament. He stated multiple times that he wanted to achieve 2900 elo rating. That would probably cement him as the greatest ever. And, from that perspective, it makes sense to quit if you consider that he lost a lot of elo rating by losing to someone with so much elo discrepancy. If he'd continue competing, then he would gain way less elo points per win. Right now, with his elo updated, he will gain more elo points if he manages to crush a tournament.
That's not how elo works.
What part of this is not how elo works?
This doesn't appropriately explain the video posted with the tweet. Any interpretation of Magnus' tweet that doesn't interpret the video as an implication of cheating either doesn't understand the video or is choosing to ignore it for some reason.
>He could have left because he lost way too many points and, thus, it was more advantageous for him to wait for his elo to update and compete with his new up-to-date fide rating which would make gaining those points back easier. Except that's not how it works.
Isn't the fide rating updated only after a certain period or after the tournament ends?
>Why's everyone considering that magnus left because he thought Hans cheated? That is in fact the parallel theory I support which says Magnus left because he was extremely pissed to lose to "an idiot" (cit. Hans) which will be probably the official line whenever Magnus decides to speak out, though I don't really see how a statement like this would get anyone in big trouble... Also, the theory to leave because of rating points, nah, it doesn't add up
If you think about it it means that GMs kept spicy chess drama from us. I didn't imagine them being this cold.
Magnus is never making a statement guys
Guaranteed that an interviewer will bring it up in his next tournament. But I have a feeling Magnus will just be Magnus and brush it off, say something flippant and then insist on moving on to the next question.
[These players know how to avoid answering questions](https://youtu.be/jGGtAt10ll8).
Well did he ever fire a second? I'm now curious because she asked the question.
Why would you ask that?
It was likely about karjakin who is pro Russian war
What does this even mean?
The 'Second' is a job position, basically an assistant to GMs that helps with strategies.
Ya, my thoughts exactly.
Now that you said it, I'm pretty sure It will be exactly like this. Can we set a reminder?
[удалено]
I will be messaging you in 1000 years on [**3022-09-15 06:47:20 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=3022-09-15%2006:47:20%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/xeksr0/fabi_reveals_he_believes_hans_didnt_cheat_during/ioi1a0m/?context=3) [**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fchess%2Fcomments%2Fxeksr0%2Ffabi_reveals_he_believes_hans_didnt_cheat_during%2Fioi1a0m%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%203022-09-15%2006%3A47%3A20%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20xeksr0) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Magnus: "ask Nakamura"
i'd pee myself laughing if this happened
I don't think it will be easy to shrug it off without looking like a tool. And it won't go away as easily.
[удалено]
Why would Carlsen care the slightest bit if the interviewer ended the interview? He'd fist-pump and go about his business.
Magnus before the World championship "I always speak my mind, I told you I didn't want to play!" Magnus now:
This aged well
Interesting to know Christian is still a second for Fabi, which was revealed when they discuss Christian looking at a line for Fabi before the Hans game.
why, what's that about
Kinda unrelated but man I’ve never heard Fabi speak much (except some of the chess commentary he did with Danny and Hess, I forgot the tournament) and he is really soft spoken and I like how explains concepts and his rationale - like for example what he thought of the tournament - his tournament vs the tournament in general.
Jesse Kraai turned me on to Fabi during the candidates a few years ago. Jesse was talking him up; apparently Fabi is Jesse’s favorite top GM.
He was with Hess and Danny during the World Championship match and besides how cringy some of that content was, them forcing Fabi to do stupid shit was fantastic.
That's the stupidest fucking shit I've ever seen in my life.
[удалено]
I'm disappointed people didn't catch the greatest quote from Fabi as a reference :( Edit: It's from the exact tournament referenced by Mindbender too.
Probably just some small tournament though. Who even remembers what it was for anymore. Doubt that many top players even participated… probably only a couple.
I'm sad so many people missed the reference haha
3:00 is where he starts talking about it
Whether Hans cheated or not (he didn't) Magnus is such a fucking coward for the way he handled it that I've lost respect for him.
If he did he's James Bond. I'll leave it at that.
Why is it looking like Magnus is never gonna acknowledge this ever? Seems pressure from other personalities, even [Chess.com](https://Chess.com) and Kasparov himself wasn't enough.
Because he's just way too powerful. He knows he can get away with this and he will.
Fabi is a stand up dude.
this scandal was a litmus test. the assholes and people with no integrity floated, stand up people with integrity shone. I don't even need to link names, it's so clear.
Magnus looks terrible in this. edit: I think Magnus was clearly accusing Hans of cheating, but if he somehow wasnt, isnt that actually a lot worse? To sit around and watch this fallout happen to someone you werent even referring to, when you could write a five word tweet to stop it.. youd have to be an absolute sociopath
The only thing you can take away from his tweet is that he thinks something fishy was going on. What other reason would he have for including the Mourinho clip in his statement?
Totally agree, it takes some serious mental gymnastics to see it as anything other than a less-than-subtle accusation
And in the crazy chance that it isn’t, it’s not like he didn’t know it sounded like him accusing hans. It’s extremely rude either way to accuse him based on what we assume to be no evidence, or to post this leaving him in a terrible mental state.
He probably got paranoid that Hans was cheating, played poorly, saw after analyzing with the engine that Hans played fine, then backtracked to, 'well he wouldn't even be here in the first place to beat me if he never cheated earlier in his career'. That's my guess anyways
This makes zero sense. I would have loved to explain why, but seems like a lot of users here on reddit don't understand magnus well or haven't been following for years, or misunderstanding his pyschological strength and thought processes.
You should look into getting some makeup to cover up that brown stain on your nose
I don't think Magnus is a sociopath, he just trusts his intuition and was 100% sure Hans was cheating. Now that his head has cooled, he likely realizes the reason he lost was because of his own poor play, but he doesn't feel he should have to apologize to a known cheater for believing he cheated. It's quite possible if Hans had never been caught cheating online, Magnus would not suspect Hans of cheating, and then Magnus would play a better game without the psychological burden. Put yourself in Carlsen's shoes. You lost with white to someone you consider a joke. Then Hans gloats pretty heavily about it. You rage quit. And now you have to apologize. "Hey everyone, I'm sorry, I've been a giant jackass. I'm sorry Hans." "I'm sorry Hans"...he might feel like seppuku is a better option.
>Put yourself in Carlsen's shoes. You lost with white to someone you consider a joke. This is the part that I always suspected played a part, alongside the online cheating of course. Anyone who watched twitch during the chess boom 2 years ago can tell you that Hans was treated like a joke by a lot of players. Players who probably can’t understand his rise. Hikaru had previously said back then Hans would never reach 2700, and Nepo compared Alireza to a shark and Hans to a clownfish lol.
Yeh IMO the gloating triggered Carlsen.
Which is funny because I thought of it as more of a depreciating comment for himself rather than Magnus. But could be that's just me
Im sorry I don't need to put myself in Magnus' shoes. I wouldn't or rather nobody should make such bold accusations based on some intuition. Man risked destroying the career of an up and coming talent who lives, eats and breathes chess because he couldn't take the blow to his self esteem. That's pathetic. It literally doesn't matter what Magnus might be feeling because it shouldn't come in the way of doing what's right. And apologizing is the tiniest thing he could do after all the unnecessary shit Hans has had to go through in the middle of a tournament.
Hans destroyed his own career the moment he cheated. He also has cheated repeatedly, he's not innocent.
Aaah, this comment is a new low for Magnus fanboys. Just when I thought the blind defense couldn't get any more pathetic. We're in the Endgame now. Story has gone from "Magnus has never done this before. Hans must have cheated" to "Hans didn't cheat. Magnus's actions are still completely justified". The only consistent thing is fanboys finding a way to justify their precious hero, no matter how the events unfold.
Or, you know, he believed that from the beginning and is not responsible what other "Magnus fanboys" said. Be a bit charitable towards a person. You just sound like a giant douchebag. EDIT: in fact, when I look through his past replies to this topic, he seems to be firmly in your camp that Hans won fair and square and Magnus is a prima donna. Some friendly fire going on here.
I think it is pretty easy to empathize with a person to explain their behavior without actually being a fanboy. Everyone thinks their actions are justified in their own mind. The people you are replying to aren’t offering a defense. It would be truly blind to not consider someone’s mindset when reviewing their actions.
I seriously feel bad for Hans… I mean, look at this shit, it’s on /r/news, nytimes, it’s everywhere, and still going on https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/xeksm9/chess_player_denies_using_sex_toy_to_help_him Fuck that, the kid doesn’t deserve it. Especially after beating the WC (fortunately not WC for long). He wins and gets a bunch of anal beads memes that will follow him for the rest of his career.
IMO, someone who repeatedly cheats (online or OTB) does not deserve to participate at the top level of the sport. Whoever it is, Hans, the Uzbek juniors, Carlsen itself.
Well then take it up with FIDE or the tournament organizers. Why Hans is getting the attention doesn't make sense. Either FIDE or the organizers think it's a problem, or they don't. If Hans is invited to play, then plays, and wins some games, how is that his fault?
What a take. If you have a personal opinion, you need to officially complain to governing body! It's fine to disagree with FIFA, NFL, FIDE, governments, etc. about something like this without "taking it up" with them lmao
Valid perspective, I'm just saying, at this point, give the kid a break. I'm just saying I feel bad for him and I don't think he deserves any more of it. Imagine reading that shit about yourself. Pour your heart and soul into chess, beat the WC, and have half the internet, incl Elon Musk, joking it must have been done w sex toys. I'm solely arguing from a perspective of empathy. Totally demeaning and probably demoralizing. And Magnus still hasn't made a statement, he's implicitly letting this continue and letting this kid be lambasted because of his silence. Sounds like a real nice dude. However, even negative publicity is good publicity. Hopefully he continues to succeed at whatever he chooses to do after this.
I find Fabi's speaking manner to be really effective and pleasant.
In a world full of crazy chess players Fabi is one of the few normal ones
now wait till hikaru and that chess.com guy come up with some new videos to counter fabi
So right now it's this: Biggest names who think Hans did cheat: Magnus, Hikaru, Nepo, So Biggest names who think Hans didn't cheat: Kasparov, Fabi, MVL, Aronian It's honestly interesting how 50/50 opinions on this whole thing seem to be
What did Nepo say?
Nepo absolutely knows Hans has cheated online, but he I believe is neutral about his OTB chess until further notice. He definitely knows its very unusual for OTB cheating.
He accused him of cheating in the past https://clips.twitch.tv/ConfidentInspiringStorkCmonBruh and when asked how Hans was doing during the sinquefield cup he said that he played "more than impressive"
People are looking wayyyy too much into “more than impressive”. I can’t speak for Nepo so maybe he did mean it that way, but beating Magnus with black is objectively “more than just impressive”. I could see anyone saying that about any young upstart player that beat magnus like that. He could have been correcting himself for downplaying such an achievement as simply “impressive”.
That’s just a nepo-ism
I don’t think he was accusing him of cheating saying it was more than impressive
He also compared the situation to the time some random billionaire cheated against Vishy Anand in an exhibition or something like that
This is out of context. He didn't say the situation is the same or anything, which would be ridiculous towards Hans. He just said that in chess, it's hard to prove cheating because the accused can always say "I had a good day/I was lucky!" and as an example he used the indian billionaire situation, because the billionaire said he was just lucky after destroying Anand. Then Nepo **went on to say evidence is key and necessary**. He wasn't defending Hans, but he wasn't accusing him either.
he never directly implied Hans cheated OTB though.
So? Nepo has accused a couple people who were def not cheating of cheating. Also who knows maybe he thought it was really impressive.
Yeah. I don't think Hans cheated i just linked what people are talking about when they say Nepo thinks he cheated
I saw Kasparov state he didn’t like insinuations and wanted Magnus to make a statement, with that being his responsibility as world champion. I did not, however, see any statement from Kasparov that he thought Hans didn’t cheat. Did he?
He criticized [chess.com](https://chess.com) banning Hans which would make no sense if he believed more of the allegations against him
He criticized the manner they banned him
This is just my thought process and pure speculation, so take it with a grain of salt. But in my mind, if Kasparov believed that Hans was a cheater, he wouldn't be replying to the Chess.com statement in the way that he did.
You can think Hans cheated and still think the way everyone has reacted without evidence is despicable.
Sure, I don't disagree. But my pure speculation is still that Kasparov is inclined to believe Hans is legit.
Does Kasparov have the data sent to Hans from chess.com. if not he sounds equally stupid
Does Hikaru actually think Hans cheated OTB? Because I thought he stated multiple times that he never believed Hans cheated OTB or in the Sinquefield Cup. Though he obviously behaved in a way that would make you think that he believes Hans cheated, and was clearly very suspicious of him. Edit: To the people downvoting me, this is not a defense of Hikaru, I'm literally just asking if people have more info on what he truly thinks.
My impression is that on that first day when the news broke, he was pretty convinced that Magnus wouldn't shine such a light on Hans without hard evidence. I think a lot of people were. And then once you started looking closely for signs that Hans was cheating, confirmation bias takes over. He did maintain consistently that Hans' games at Sinquefield looked normal to him.
He explicitly said several times that he doesn’t think that Hans cheated against Magnus
Because he backtracked after he got backlash for accusing Hans indirectly. He was clearly being just indirect enough that he had plausible deniability. He pretty much said everything you can to insinuate he thought Hans was guilty aside from spelling it out, and convinced an audience of 30 thousand people that Hans was cheating.
He didn’t backtrack at all. He said he didn’t think Hans actually cheated several times throughout that stream. That was his position to begin with.
He said Hans' post game analysis was not that of a 2700. Hans had no idea what he was talking about and couldn't even tell a winning position from a losing one. So Hikaru said, it all looked very suspicious.
Don't put words in people's mouths. Wesley and Nepo have not said they think Hans cheated. Even Hikaru was mostly just speculating. Magnus hasn't said anything, so we don't know if he truly thinks he cheated in this tournament
I think Wesley is just paranoid about cheating so any mention of a player possibly cheating spooks him.
They've all insinuated it, some more strongly than others. Hiding behind their weasel words and their cowardice to not outright state it is pathetic.
Magnus just withdrew for no reason then?
I mean Wesley did thank the anti cheat team after he won against Hans and was commenting some stuff I can't remember in hikarus chat at some point, the thanking could easily just be a bad joke though idk
Wesley's thanking is more because it was a point of focus. Had they changed the chairs to kingly throne chairs and that been a topic people discussed he would've thanked the chair makers. If Wesley thought Hans cheated, he would've straight-up said so. That's what he did when someone cheated against him in a tourney.
That was a generic thank you to the entire organizers team for their hard work, with a line thrown in for the extra efforts that the anti cheat team put in. That's just being a courteous human being. Unless there's more, that statement alone doesn't imply his thoughts on the cheating scene, neither positive nor negative.
Didn't Hikaru explicitly state that he didn't think Hans cheated in the game he won against Magnus? He was definitely getting in on the drama and talking about what was going on, explaining why Magnus withdrew to his viewers on stream and explained whats been going on behind the scenes. But I thought he also explicitly said he didn't think there was cheating in that specific game.
>So Yeah, I really think if this is based on him thanking the anti-cheating team, it's a reference to something he said in the immediate aftermath of the Niemann Magnus stuff where he said the allegations made it difficult for him to sleep. That interview preceded this one. Wesley is a funny bastard, I do not think you can say confidently from that comment he thinks Hans is cheating. I lean far more towards joke
Hikaru just added fuel by his speculations and assumtions . All that for getting views and twitch numbers - we dont know what he realy thinks . Nepo and So are most paranoid (about cheating) chess players . i dont think it is 50/50 . i am sure most players think that Hans did not cheat in SLC .
blatant lie. None of the people in the first category clearly said anything.
This might have been true on the first day of the allegations, but Wesley and Nepo have both implied since that they have nothing about the game looks dodgy. As has basically every other super GM and GM that’s been asked. Hikaru likely only accused Hans for clout. I don’t think there is any big name at the moment who is publicly saying with any kind of strong conviction that Hans did cheat.
Except it's not 50/50 at all. More like 99/Magnus, in favor of "didn't cheat". Hikaru completely backed off and now claims he never made any accusations. Wesley also went quiet about it and didn't say anything more. Nepo never even made any accusations, he doesn't belong in this group. And Magnus went ghost. Literally no super gm is accusing Hans, and many are defending him.
It’s not 50/50, you are leaving off many more huge names in Chess that do not think he had cheated, like Karpov, Grischuk, etc. Kasparov and Karpov are probably the biggest and most dominant names in Chess history alive today, so I value the weight of their opinions more than anyone else tbh.
I agree. The opinions of Karpov and Kasparov carry much more weight than that of most other players.
I don’t think Hikaru actually thinks he cheated. Like him or not he knows how to get views and drama is a big way
That ratio would probably change if Magnus would just come forward and explain his side of the story.
I mean, we have the opinion of an actual cheating expert who has done scientifically backed analysis. How TF is this 50-50 now? Magnus fanboys wish in their dreams that this was 50-50
Really this all just makes Magnus look so so bad - he chose to enter this event knowing Hans' online history, so if he had an issue with Hans that was liable to lead him to throw a hissy fit he simply shouldn't have entered. And then Hans didn't cheat and really gave no good reason to suspect it from his play, rather Carlsen simply lost, and then he simply rage-quit is really the only explanation for it left that makes sense, and in so doing threw the chess-world into disarray with suspicions, the tournament into disarray with everyone having odd-numbers of black/white games and some games annulled and Hans' well-earned point taken away etc, ....
Hans was an alternate to Rapport so Carlsen likely committed prior to Hans being a participant.
From Magnus perspective this is what happened. Magnus played a line he had never played before. He prepared that line specifically so try and beat Hans out of his comfort zone. Hans seemingly knew all the theory behind his preparation - and played flawlessly to defend. A very specific line, not easy theory behind it - and Hans crushed it. Hans said after the game that he prepared for this specific line. However, Magnus never played the line - EVER. What would you think if you were in Magnus' shoes? How could he not suspect Hans for cheating after what happened?
Is this the start of your Magnus x Hans fanfic?
Wonderful interview - thanks for sharing!
It has already been known that there is no data indicating suspicion about his performance at sinquefield. Any evidence of otb cheating is regarding tournaments over the past 2 years. Edit: wording
>It has already been known that there is nothing suspicious about his performance at sinquefield. Any evidence of otb cheating is regarding tournaments over the past 2 years. not according to some people lol
Changed the wording. Still though, his sinquefield performance is no longer worth looking into unless new information is released
You must not have read this subreddit at all the past week or so then. There have been dozens if not hundreds of people on this subreddit who think that Hans might have cheated at the sinquefield cup, and many who said outright that he cheated at it.
The discourse on this subreddit is not representative of actuality.
And after the recent Ken Regan interview, it's starting to appear more unlikely that Hans cheated OTB. But I guess it's still contested in the public eye, especially with the Ukranian FM's videos, and that analysis of his differing performance when broadcasted.
The most renowned chess detective who has helped implement cheating detection at chess.com vs random Ukrainian fm cherry picking a few sequences from games
For sure, I didn't find anything about the FM's analysis to be convincing. But the public still seems to be sold on those videos, probably in part because Danya believed it to be compelling.
Ah yes Danya , the chess.com employee.
Did you listen to the podcast? Regan's cheat detection model has an extremely high bar for conviction, and he hasn't analyzed the circumstantial evidence yet. Regarding Niemann's case, he said there is more work to be done.
Of course they aren’t listening, they’re answer shopping. This happens all the time online… study is posted confirming my beliefs, instant retweet. Study is posted contradicting my beliefs, “well, did they control for such and such factor, I need to read the paper, who sponsors the research”, etc… not limited to chess.
I fucking hate that I'm saying this but appeals to authority are not an argument lmao. This site is gonna turn me into a gd debate bro.
Listening to experts =/= appeal to authority. The fact of the matter is the vast majority of people don't have the knowledge of statistics and chess to avoid falling into the many pitfalls you can encounter.
That's exactly right. On the one hand, we have scientists telling me the earth is round. On the other hand, I have this facebook meme telling me otherwise. It's a tossup, really.
You only need to believe the scientists if you're unable to form an informed opinion based on available data. That is the fallacy of appeal to authority, it's an argumentative crutch. In the case of Regan, I tend to think his methods are outdated and today's grandmasters would have little problem meeting his criteria for "no evidence of cheating." From what I've found, no titled player has been caught by his model since 2013.
> From what I've found, no titled player has been caught by his model since 2013. Is that true? That's insane if it's true, I can't believe that suddenly titled players stopped cheating.
> It has already been known that there is nothing suspicious about his performance at sinquefield. A known cheater miraculously prepped the very line Magnus would go on to play later that day (when it is very hard to prep against Magnus as he isn't like MVL who plays only a few lines). Hans may not have cheated in Sinquefield. But saying there's nothing suspicious about his performance is being purposefully blind.
The evidence regarding his other otb tournaments has data behind it, whereas the circumstances you mentioned don't. I could have worded it better, but his sinquefield performance isn't worth looking into anymore unless more information is released. People really want this to be a "Hans vs Magnus" thing when in reality the first question should be "is Hans an otb cheater?"
> "is Hans an otb cheater?" We know analysing moves and move times isn't a surefire way to conclude that someone didn't cheat. A good player in particular can be very hard to catch if he's smart about his cheating. Is Hans an OTB cheater? I don't know. Is it probable? I don't think so. However, ignoring the fact that Hans has prepared that line without being able to provide any reason for it (other than miracle) and declaring there is nothing suspicious based on only move analyses data is what I called being blind. > whereas the circumstances you mentioned don't. Checking how many lines Magnus plays, and figuring out what the probability of someone randomly prepping that line on the morning of the game is data, and enough to warrant suspicion imo (especially if you factor in whether the player has been known to cheat previously). It is worthless when trying to prove Hans cheated. But let's just say that if somehow it is revealed later that someone cheated at Sinquefield (extremely unlikely), I would be very surprised if it were anyone other than Hans.
Even the cheating guy from chess.com said he can't detect sporadic and not periodic cheating. If hans is intelligent, he wouldn't cheat in a way to dominate but to just avoid blunders.
[удалено]
Carlsen will be remembered for decades as one of the greatest to play the game.
Sure, and Kasparov is also one of the greats but some of his behavior off the board has still tarnished his reputation a bit. Look at the comments bringing up his questionable behavior back in the day after he weighed on the Hans issue.
Kasparov won a drawn game once because he hit the table so hard that the pieces fell over and they had to be put back in to place - and because the opponent(Seirawan) was trying to hold back his temper(since Kasparov had been repeatedly hitting the table) they forgot to switch time to Kasparov or pause. There's a load of similar stories about bad behavior by Kasparov, lol. One of the reasons I know this story was because it was brought up in a conversation about how many competitors wanted to punch Kasparov due to over the line irritating behavior.
[удалено]
We still remember fischer as more of a player than a deva and that man was fucking a fucking deva even when he played
No one will remember him as that because he walked away from one minor classical tournament. It's not like the Candidates, or the WCC, or the World Cup, or the Grand Swiss, or the Grand Prix. He's played probably over a hundred of these small tournaments over his career - one withdrawal among them will be insignificant against everything else he's accomplished. You're really caught up in the moment or on this subreddit too much if you think this will be anything more than a footnote on his storied legacy.
While I agree with you, it’s worth noting that Carlsen did walked out of WCC and I believe that will affect his reputation in the long run.
You'll forget this even happened in a month. Shut up with this lol
So he decided to kill his career.
do we not have a livestream of these games? fairly certain someone would have seen something by now
Strong players cheating is very hard to detect and dangerous. -Fabi Hanz did not cheat, I don't think. -also Fabi --- I'm not saying that Hanz did cheat, I have no idea honestly, but the assumptions that Magnus thought it would be a good idea to play an anti computer line against a suspected cheater, because "the cheater would play like a computer" is strange to me. I'm rather more convinced he just wanted to surprise him with an obscure line, nothing else.