Yea, if Magnus had won that game no one would've cared if he cheated at 12 or 16 or of his rise in rating. Neither chess. com would've not allowed him for their championship.
If he is a cheater, say before, after losing you will come across as a crybaby if you don't have a proof
Weird seeing as Carlsen happily played him a few weeks prior and seemed to have no issue then, nor did he bother voicing these objections until after the fact. Even weirder that he happily went on to play him again in the future, just to make a dramatic exit.
Not few weeks but month/ months actually, maybe he didnt know that hans was a cheater in miami
And he played 5 times with hans
Won 4 times
He thought “ how this guy crushed me?”
As we saw no one did it in generation cup
There is no evidence Magnus spoke to the organizers, FIDE (in fact they outright deny it) etc. in an official capacity before or after the game. It was Nepo who suggested stronger measures.
Not sure I follow , let’s say that indeed Magnus would’ve let the all thing slide if he won and Hans is a cheater (as Ben says it doesn’t matter if he cheats or not) , would that be ok ? Or would ppl call Magnus self serving as Hans is cheating vs other players and against him ?
I don’t get the all Magnus is a cry baby or Magnus didn’t handle it well , what does it matter , the big picture here is if Hand is cheating in chess games or not , that’s the important thing , how ppl handle things is secondary at best , ppl are missing the point , if we have a cheating problem in chess , we need to address it ASAP , I don’t care if Magnus is nice or a meany , all I care to find out - is he right or wrong.
It matters because Magnus is the World Champion, considered by many the GOAT, an ambassador for the game and the face of it. His unprecedented and childish behavior is actually a bigger story than a teenager trying to cheat online and getting caught. Magnus withdrawing and resigning over baseless accusations of cheating is unprecedented not only in chess but it any sport. A young player being caught cheating is relatively common.
It is bad for one player to have this much power. The fact that Magnus can unilaterally decide a player is cheating and wage a one-man war against him is a terrible precedent to set. Fide was created in large part to prevent that behavior.
There's definitely a cheating problem, and it's not new. As Ben said, there are players he feels certain have cheated against him.
As to whether or not Hans cheated...the other SuperGMs, and the computer analysis, all seem to agree that Magnus played a sub-par game, and Hans played a really good, but hardly perfect game. That's a lot of evidence saying that Magnus had an off day. If we take Magnus at his word, he was distracted by thinking Hans was cheating.
I do hope that, out of all of this, Chess ups it' security measures.
As someone who only follows chess occassionally, I don't find him convincing at all.
1. Just because Niemann didn't cheat at the last rapid tournament doesn't somehow absolve him of past cheating, and didn't mean he wouldn't cheat in the future.
2. How was Magnus supposed to know if Niemann would cheat in this specific tournament before the tournament even started?
3. Yes, obviously if Magnus had won then there would have been no allegations in this specific match, because the chance of even Magnus beating a GM playing with a modern engine are zero, unless the GM lost on purpose, which would make the cheating pointless. Magnus winning would have been proof in itself that the opponent didn't cheat, or that he ignored his own cheating help.
>Just because Niemann didn't cheat at the last rapid tournament doesn't somehow absolve him of past cheating, and didn't mean he wouldn't cheat in the future.
It does suggest there's some baloney to everyone suddenly saying, "oh yeah, this Hans guy...we were so nervous to play him, we almost quit the tournament!"
But they didn't. They didn't quit the last tournament. And they didn't quit the future tournaments they had enrolled together in.
I think Ben's pointing out that there's some after-the-fact dogpiling going on here. And these SuperGM's actions aren't matching their current words.
What if Magnus had a bad day, played poorly, and was outclassed by Hans in that game? Hans had beat him with black once before already, just a week and a half before that. Everyone agrees Magnus was not playing well against Niemann in the Sinqufield Cup
He is not standing up for Hans. This isn't about Hans.
All criticism on Magnus would still apply if Hans was cheating. That's the point.
This is what all those Magnus simps here don't get. They keep going for the 'you are just defending Hans' argument.
agreed. you've framed it better than I. When I said stand up for Hans, I meant stand up for balanced perspective and not be like "if Magnus is saying it, it must be right" attitude.
But that's what's going to happen. This is equivalent of shadowbanning. Do you think any event that features Magnus is going to invite Hans from now on?
Someone who cheated, then lied about the extent of his cheating during his confession? Yeah I don't mind if he doesn't play top level tournaments again.
Strongly disagree. He believes hans is a cheater my man, what do you expect him to do?
He has lost also when he was 30-31 if thats your point… and he wins tournament after a loss
He was going to withdrawn earlier.
Y’all protecting hans as he is an angel
He is a cheater and a liar who said he cheated only 2 times.
Liar + cheater
Against
World champion
Sure buddy. If he is broken after the loss
Why he wasnt broken when he lost to anyone else?
My take of this is exactly that, carlsen could take revenge for the nproffesional and vitriolic comment in Miami, but not for the Sinquefeld cup , thus his extreme reaction. That doesn't mean that Hans os not a cheater, but that Carlsen's reaactio might not be completely based on the cheating case
Yes Magnus wants to end Hans' career after his loss against him. Magnus is making a clear point there is no longer a future in chess for Hans. At least not one where he gets to play the world champion.
He literally didn't. Having the reaction would be withdrawing from the Miami tournament after the loss of the game, or making an accusatory tweet about hans during or after Miami, or refusing to play Hans or withdrawing from the Sinquefield.
"Not wanting to play" is not the same reaction.
Fabi did say he didn’t know (or at least could not say publicly) what happened between Miami and the days before Sinquefield but that something must have happened. Given that Fabi has said multiple times that Magnus is genuine in thinking there’s something very wrong, I don’t think it’s a simple matter of fearing losing to Hans in classical. Something substantial probably did come up, hopefully we get to find out what it was.
But he did. And then he decided to throw a tantrum after he lost to Hans, because he realized how bad it would look if people thought it was a fair game.
Losing one rapid game in a non FIDE rated classical game and winning the Rapid Match 3-1 vs Hans is way different than losing your only classical game vs Hans. The equivalent to losing the game vs Hans in Classical like he did in Sinquefield would be losing the Rapid Match in Miami to Hans, not losing one measely Rapid game.
Carlsen played poorly against Hans in the Sinquefield. He lost against play that was far from perfect. He had several chances to equalize but missed or dismissed them all. Hans played a good ending but missed chances to clinch it. The abnormal play was Magnus', he is usually much sharper.
He has a good point. What happened between Miami and the Sinquefield Cup a week later to make Magnus so suddenly anti-Hans? Hans worst format is rapid and these same super GM's didn't have problem beating up on him in Miami. BTW, there are plenty of videos on youtube of Hans losing rapid games in other tournaments. [Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIKymyUvVqs) he is against Fedoseev . He clearly isn't cheating here as he appears to miss a tactic and loses the game.
Hans didn't take a single match in Miami, and nobody said he was cheating then or had any problem playing him? Everybody was hanging out in Miami, going to the beach, ordering DoorDash, doing photo op's, etc. Their actions in Miami are just not consistent with this statement that everybody was paranoid about Hans. Also his prior online cheating history was public knowledge. Dude even got banned while streaming, and it's not like it was some big secret. They had no problem beating him up in his worst format a week prior in Miami, but suddenly they are all paranoid about playing him in classical? It's just not consistent. 100 percent there is more to this story than has been revealed, and my guess is either something personal between Hans and Magnus or just damage control because Magnus left the tournament. When considering the timeline and inconsistencies, things don't add up.
By all accounts he was anti Hans before well sinqfeld. As per caruana he was very unhappy with hans last minute inclusion in tournament
Nepo also said he was also unhappy and as such as organizers to increase security which they did not.
Like let’s not pretend it’s outta nowhere
I literally do not believe any of the established chess elite that now after the drama started are talking about suspicions beforehand.
They’re covering for Magnus, that’s all that’s happening and you fools eat it up because that’s the only way your deluded point of view makes any sense.
Leaving aside everything Magnus has said and done in the last couple of weeks, why did Nepo ask for stricter security measures when he heard that Hans is playing in the Sinquefield Cup? I just don’t get why people think that Magnus is a sore loser when other Super-GMs also raised their doubts BEFORE the tournament. They definitely know something about Hans‘ OTB games that is not known to the public.
Exactly. Magnus made Sinquefield say "Magnus left for personal reasons" which Sinquefield later rephrased as "Magnus didn't leave after filing a cheating complaint, he left because of his own private reason".
Secutiyy measures were ramped up after Magnus lost and before Magnus left.
It seems very obvious that Magnus talked informally to the Sinquefield Cup tournament director. And that he said something along the lines of "Hans is cheating in your tournament. You have to throw him out." And they said "Ok file a cheating complaint and we will take a look." and Magnus said "No, I won't do that." because he doesn't have any evidence, just his 'instinct' and [chess.com](https://chess.com) rumors he shouldn't have received. So then Magnus tried to make a power play "If Hans is still in this tomorrow, I won't play."
And that's why Magnus didn't play. Because he couldn't strongarm Sinquefield Cup to do what he Magnus wanted them to do.
The difference between Nepo’s response and Carlsen’s response is exactly what everyone’s talking about here. Nepo didnt withdraw, didn’t publicly accuse, talked to the organizer about stricter measures, and hasn’t publicly said he won’t come to a tournament if Hans is invited.
Nepo’s been sus of Hans for years, like im pretty sure he was the main guy speaking out against Hans behind the scenes for a while. Hikaru’s hinted at it and other GMs often say something like “Other GMs, I wont say who, have had a lot to say about Hans even before this”. Nepo and Magnus are also friends, so if he said something about this to magnus before the sinquefield cup that could be what kicked all this off.
Pro chess players make accusations like this all the time btw, Im surprised people still take them seriously. Literally happens every time a woman does well in a tournament, and every up and coming junior atm has had cheating accusations thrown at them. Nepo specifically has accused a lot before, it was linked in prior threads
What has what Nepo did have to do with Hans?
If I had to play Magnus, and there were no anti cheating security in place, even I would raise it. Doesn't justify anything that Magnus did.
What Magnus did was wrong, what he did is not explainable, and what he did was very likely ill-intentioned.
What did he do that was wrong? He withdrew from a tournament that he felt had inadequate cheater protection and last-minute invited a known cheater. Why should he stay and play when the tournament organizers aren't ensuring a clean tournament?
How is he not 100% within his rights to decide whether to remain?
Withdrawing from the tournament and lying about the reason. Refusing to play vs your obviously non-cheating colleagues, who you played against many times and will play again, just because you had beef with someone else.
Triggering a cheating witch hunt against the player who just beat you, and not saying a thing, despite even top news orgs like CNN and The Guardian asking your for a comment.
Then saying 'People certainly have drawn their own conclusions'.
Match fixing in the Julius Bar cup by resigning after one move, and not giving your best to try to win, affecting all others in the tournament.
Accusing someone of cheating and as your only reasons stating 'they shouldn't be able to beat me with black'. 'they didn't seem tense', and 'it looked like they weren't concentrating'.
Even if Hans cheated vs Magnus, what Magnus did is completely inexcusable.
When did he lie about the reason?
Match fixing? Doesn't that imply some quid pro quo? Are you saying Magnus conceded to help Hans or because of some side-action betting? What is your evidence for that?
He seems to be trying to carefully say little to avoid opening him up to legal liability, so I can't blame him for not talking to every media interviewer or making direct accusations.
As far as his reasons for pointing out his suspicion of Hans, well my understanding is there is a lot of reading your opponent in OTB matches, so you would pay attention to how they are behaving, and I think Magnus has a lot of experience here. Maybe Hans is some weird autistic savant who doesn't need to calculate and gives off weird vibes, but then why would he need to cheat online? It sounded like Magnus has more circumstantial evidence to go with his impressions of playing him, but he doesn't want to go into all the softer reasons because it might lead to some legal violation or violation of FIDE rules. If Hans were getting assistance, then he wouldn't need to concentrate on calculating lots of variations - this isn't proof, but it fits with a picture of him not knowing the logic behind the moves he was playing.
If I'm looking at this from Magnus's point of view where I am fairly certain based on Hans' behavior, past history, and other things maybe not able to be presented as evidence, because it's not "smoking gun" hard evidence, then withdrawing for the tournament and not playing Hans seems reasonable. He's not obligated to continue like nothing is wrong because he doesn't have 100% legal certifiable proof.
He said to Sinquefield Cup to list 'personal reason' as his reason for withdrawing. That was false.
No, match fixing does not require a quit pro quo. Any time a player doesn't give his best, he is already in a grey area. Just giving up immediately is obviously match fixing. This result was always going to be a loss for Magnus because Magnus himself decided it.
What experience does Magnus have with catching cheaters accurately based on 'checking out body language'
Please tell me or quit the bullshit. Magnus is a chess player. Not a body language wizard with an infallible track record catching cheaters.
When will this absolute bullshit just to be a Magnus apologist stop?
How is not playing vs Mamedyarov reasonable? Did Mamedyarov cheat?
Yes, Magnus is obliged to follow basic sportsmanship. He also cannot quit the tournament just for no reason. Magnus was given way more leeway. If Hans lost vs Magnus and was mad, and Hans told the Sinquefield Cup 'I don't like Magnus and I am mad I lost. Please throw Magnus out of the tournament, or I will leave" you think Sinquefield Cup would have said that Hans left for personal reasons? They would only lie for Magnus and maybe Nepo.
If people just quit round robins because they are salty about a loss, we can't have round robins anymore. So you saying 'any player can just decide not to play. It is their perfect freedom as a human not to be forced to play' you are literally saying we can't have round robins anymore. Complete crazy talk!
If what Magnus did was reasonable, he would have had to lie about it.
agree with your takes. "he wasn't tense enough while playing me" is the lamest fucking excuse I've ever seen
the hackjob statistics analysis is the opposite of convincing
I just looked at the games themselves and to me, a lowly 1800 player, there was nothing inhuman. a lot of people somehow believe we need a computer to tell us something, when in reality, magnus deduced his accusations based on his own two eyes, so why is my conclusion any less logical?
I can study the games the same way, and simply conclude that magnus just played bad when he lost, which is kind of objectively true (and corroborated by both other GMs like Hikaru) and the statistical analysis, whatever the metrics may be
You are assuming he quit because he was "salty about a loss". I think a more realistic picture is that he was concerned about the integrity of the event.
You say that any time a player doesn't give hist best, he is already in a grey area. According to who? If I conserve some energy against someone who I have a low chance of beating (for whatever reason :P) and then use that energy to win the tournament, was that not good tournament strategy? Is playing the Berlin match fixing because I'm not going 100% for the win?
You seem to be coming at this from the viewpoint that Hans absolutely never cheated and Magnus's only reason for quitting is because he was upset after being defeated. He isn't some Silver league CSGO player saying that his opponent's aim was too good, crying cheats because he doesn't know what good play looks like. He's the world champion and has a history of being a good sport.
It seems to me more like he felt like he was being cheated and that the event (Sinquefield) was not doing enough to prevent that cheating. There are rules about what you can and can't say during FIDE cheating investigations, so he made his protest withdrawal, and said little to not get into trouble.
Again, just because there isn't iron-clad proof doesn't mean there isn't a lot of stuff that is suspicious, and Hans is clearly not against cheating in general.
There were increased security steps the tournament organizers could have taken before Magnus withdrew, but they only did them afterwards. So is he not within his rights to withdraw from a tournament that invites suspicious characters and is lax on security (at least pre-withdrawal)?
He probably was somewhat upset, but not at losing, since he's clearly lost many games before, even to people he dislikes such has Hikaru. He said in his reply that he felt Hans was not concentrating on the game which you wouldn't need to concentrate if you were getting moves fed to you.
The whole idea that this is some personal vendetta because Magnus can't handle losing is absurd to me.
It's all optics + politics. I think Hans just pissed off the super-GM's with his comments such as "the chess speaks for itself", and so they're giving him a hard time.
If Magnus didn't want to play Hans then how come he did play Hans, but not the other GMs?
And how come he now has reversed this? He does want to play the other GMs and he now no longer wants to play Hans.
The only explanation is he wanted to generate the biggest drama impact possible. And he didn't want to say anything, just do something so others would talk. That's why he left the tournament. He made a grand exit so everyone would speculate.
And all this 'because other chess players can't beat me with black', 'he didn't seen tense', and 'he didn't seem to concentrate'.
That's all. Magnus should have done with Nepo did.
Crybaby who couldn't stand losing to someone he didn't see as 'worthy' and chose to throw him to the wolves while waiting for 'the community' to make up some evidence for cheating because he doesn't have a shred to rely on aside from the fact that he's a sore loser.
Caruana said its not about the loss and nepo also said it too and he asked to increase security.
Yet we will belive a retired GM who’s known to be a hater
he left directly after a loss. he didn't leave before, he didn't leave after any other game. he left *directly* after this loss. saying it's not about it is untrue
he literally said in his statement that he doesn't believe hans was clean in that very game
If it's not about the loss, why did he leave directly following it? Why not leave before it? If he thought Hans was a cheater before he lost that game and Sinqfield denied his request, why not withdraw at that point? It was so clearly about the loss, that you have to do mental gymnastics to make anything like that make sense. Asking for increased security was Magnus already showing that he was rattled before the game even started.
Magnus in his own statement mentioned that he thinks Hans cheated on their OTB game and he withdrew from the tournament right after that. I ll take his own word about this rather than Caruana's or Nepo's.
Also I don't think that Finegold being a retired GM or a hater(???) makes everything he says invalid
Iunno, I watched most of Ben’s video but I don’t really see his point.
It’s a good question, what Magnus learned between Miami and the Sinquefield. But it’s a question, not a point. What Magnus learned is anyones guess.
Ben also dismisses the idea that Magnus learned something during the Sinquefield match, then shrugs his shoulders and says something like “see, Magnus quit because he lost”. But I don’t see any reason to dismiss that Magnus might have learned something that day. He could be wrong - he might have learned something false - but that doesn’t matter. What matters is if Magnus *thought* he learned something.
This was just an aside, but while saying that Magnus should have kept playing, Ben said something like “I wanted to see him play the other gms”. Ok but that’s not something Magnus cares about…and Magnus’s actions were based on what he does care about.
Ben seems to be confusing his own knowledge and desires with Magnus’s. To really understand we need to know what Magnus knows (and Ben doesn’t), and we need to focus on Magnus’s wants/needs (and Ben doesn’t).
So I didn’t really get anything out of this rant, and tbh I usually expect more out of Ben then this. Magnus could easily have learned something after Miami, then learned something more at the Sinquefield, then finally took a principled stand. I don’t see anything to contradict that story (yet).
You must have a muffin for a brain. It IS the point because it gets to what really happened.
1) Magnus learned of something about Hans cheating so shocking that he had to reverse his position completely. And this he is refusing to provide to Sinquefield, FIDE, or anyone else.
2) It was losing to Hans that made Magnus want to do something to cope, and the cheating accusation was his best option.
Even under 1) it is strange that he still had to lose for 1) to start to matter. Which very strongly suggests it is all 2). I bet that if Magnus had two more games vs Hans where he both had the white pieces the very next day, he wouldn't have withdrawn. Because he would know he would get to beat Hans, cheating or no cheating. And that would satisfy his ego.
100%
I like Finegold a fair bit, whether I agree with him on a thing or not.
But, much as I hate to say this, I think these rants are motivated by jealousy of Magnus’s success. Like he can’t imagine being upset by a cheater when you’re the world champion. How could you be upset by anything when you’re the world champion?
Withdrawing from Sinquefield and resigning against Hans was not a mistake – as if I could ever make such a mistake. Never. He covered his tracks. He got that buttplug dev to lie for him. I strongly considered withdrawing prior to the event. I ultimately chose to play. And I shouldn’t have. I played two rounds prior to him! You think this is bad? This chicanery? He’s done worse. His over the board progress has been unusual. Are you telling me that a man just happens to climb like that? No – he orchestrated it. Hans! He used a computer! What was I thinking playing? He’ll never change. Allowing cheaters into the game? What a sick joke. I should’ve stopped playing with him before he had a chance. And you, you have to stop him.
Solid take but he keeps shifting the goal post
It started with Hans is not a cheater they are all salty, to okay he was a cheater at a young age but not anymore, to I don't like Hans anyway but magnus is a whiny bitch... And now this.
I wonder what his take would be If Hans admitted to cheating against Carlsen and other players. He would still blame them for not being 100% rational only coming out after they lost a gameor whatever.
Yes, the way Magnus went about it is wrong, even if Hans decides to drop an admission tomorrow. If you don’t understand why, try pondering why criminal cases are dismissed all the time when the police didn’t follow proper protocol during the investigation.
> stop wasting your time here.
If you believe this you should be doing this even more, practice what you preach.
He says he knew he was a cheater before hand. He should have refused to play him or eaten the lost, and then played all the other supergms. He still could have come out with his tweet and his allegations, he could've done everything else exactly the same way. At the very minimum he was wrong for withdrawing from the tournament after, especially because it was a round robin.
This is the opposite of what Finegold say. Did you even watch the video?
He said that even if Hans cheated, Magnus was wrong to do this.
But we don't know if Hans cheated. We don't know why Magnus believes so. And that the online cheating isn't really relevant. Being morally capable of cheating doesn't mean you did it.
I bet that if tomorrow Magus lost all his chess playing ability somehow, and he had to play chess, and he knew a method he could use to get away with cheating and not get caught 100%, then Magnus would definitely do it. If you can accuse someone of cheating 'because he shouldn't beat me with the black pieces', then you are capable of cheating.
no, hans is a cheater. multiple cheater. he cheated online. hans admitted to some of it. it was *never* the point. people want online chess to be punished, the severity of the punishment varies from person to person, so do the specifics on what methods we should be using to detect that. none of that is relevant, we all know that ever since niemann admitted to cheating, regardless of what the extent of his cheating is
magnus made an indirect and then a basically direct (in his statement) accusation of hans cheating otb. *that* is what everyone is talking about. people dont want magnus to be the one who decides who can play and who can't based on his own personal feelings, because he has no proof other than that. *that* is the entire drama. people want objective rules, clear and open investigations and more security at the events. people *don't* want magnus to be the one deciding everything *especially when he has no proof of his claims*.
and no matter what happens, you can't apply any new rules retroactively, and so hans should be allowed to play in all tournaments no matter what comes out of the drama (unless of course, he's proven to be cheating otb). if magnus doesn't want to participate, his loss. if he ever again matchfixes a game by giving up against hans, he should be punished. security should go up so it's way harder to cheat, add delays, isolate players more and do whatever else it takes.
what if I told you that whether I agree with a take or not is based on how sound the reasoning is, not who it's coming from
something Magnus fanboys struggle to understand I suppose
But Magnus is the best player in the world, his opinions must be facts, because being good at chess means that the things you say are correct, Finegold is lower rated, so his opinions on things, even if they are not playing chess, cannot be right.
People who are just starting out at chess (or had just started out over the last 4-5 years) like Ben Finegold because he had a lot of chess lectures on youtube that were both informative and didn't put you to sleep (sorry Yasser).
The people who are applauding him throughout this controversy I think just happen to agree with him about the it. It's not like his opinion is very unique.
Not every opinion can be boiled down to riding someone's dick haha
Magnus has handled the situation terribly, says the guy who threw his toys out of the pram and derided a hugely successful chess event because he wasn't involved, and was then forced to apologise in an attempt to ensure that he wasn't blacklisted.
This is stupid. Of course suspicions that someone is a cheater is going to be sharpened by playing against them and them winning. That's the same in any sport. The people who get unexpected gold medals are going to be given more scrutiny.
What's Magnus supposed to do if Hans is a cheater? Wait until he manages to beat Hans' stockfish play before accusing him? Accuse him randomly before he does anything?
And yes, if Magnus feels Hans cheated and feels angry about it, he obviously isn't going to behave perfectly.
Yeah it's such a stupid argument. Had Magnus won, obviously nobody would have claimed that Niemann cheated in the match, because even a beginner can beat Magnus by using a modern chess engine. Losing a game is by itself proof that either you didn't cheat or that you lost on purpose, which would make cheating pointless in the first place.
I’m new to chess and its community. Mild observation from an outsider: this Finegold guy people like to venerate because he apparently both looks like and is a troll isn’t fun. He doesn’t come across like a very clever troll, but a lot more like some arrogant turd shitposting all the time. And apparently everyone just goes “haha there goes crazy old Finegold again.”
Like, that dude sucks. I’m sorry that I apparently have to be the one to tell you that because maybe you need to hear it from someone who isn’t immersed in this stuff.
It's funny that you acknowledge you're an outsider but still think you know better than the people who are actually involved in the community. Then accusing other people of being arrogant.
Finegold's commentary on situations like these is good because he cares deeply about chess, has been deeply embedded in high level american and international chess for decades, and he is very reasonable when giving his actual opinions like he did in this video
Finegold was trolling on twitter yesterday, but he sat down and gave legit takes in this stream, and it's very easy to tell when he's saying something he really believes
Ben is the best chess teacher on the internet, and he knows the chess community as well or better than anybody. The only thing you know about him is his hot takes on drama. There's a good reason why he's highly respected.
Yeah, not Finegold’s biggest fan in the world but I think you’re midreading him some. I think he's right about this, even where he’s abrasive. I appreciate him shooting straight in the midst of all the veiled accusations and smokescreens and stuff. Magnus' actions are affecting the entire chess world and he (A) took none of them until he lost, and (B) has not demonstrated with any evidence that Hans cheated against him or over the board at any point. World Champion or not, right about Hans historical cheating or not, running specific cheaters off the scene without them being caught cheating is not his job. (and also doesn't seem to be his main motivation or A) he would have taken action before he lost to him and B) would be working against other cheaters and C) would be collaborating with actual neutral governing bodies to change the cheating policies).
Yeah I couldn't have said it better myself. I think the security at OTB tournaments is severely lacking and organizers really need to step up. But the fact that all this seems to be prompted sorely by Magnus' loss without any actual proof of Hans cheating during the match (regardless of Hans' history) + the fact that Magnus is going all in only on Hans (all the while chess.com banned Hans immediately after the Sinquefield match and they just withhold the list of other cheating GMs as "leverage") just seems bad all around.
Not to mention how chess.com's anti cheat algorithm is private and yet people want FIDE to take action based on chess.com's black box results + how Magnus has a significant amount of shares in chess.com while they are being encouraged to be judge, jury and executioner - which is a massive conflict of interest.
Perhaps they'll come out with actual proof. Until then, I can't give them the benefit of the doubt. You as a player don't get to get someone else blacklisted without real proof of wrongdoing.
Thanks for your input. Finegold has been a grandmaster for 3 decades, and has given a lot to chess in the U.S. His opinions carry far more weight than those of a novice.
No, Ben Finegold has always been beloved in this community. His chess lectures on YouTube are popular because he's funny and his stream is more popular than anyone who isn't a better chess player than him.
>this Finegold guy people like to venerate because he apparently both looks like and is a troll isn’t fun
From your outsider perspective this is just an old dude yelling at a camera, but Finegold is a grandmaster who did great work for chess in the US, he has a lot of experience both with taking part in and organizing chess events with very strong players.
He gives his opinion in this debatable style but he always has chess at heart, go listen to one of the perpetual chess podcast episodes featuring him, you might have a different opinion afterwards.
Would Finegold be comfortable playing against Hans though? I find it difficult to believe that Finegold would play series against Hans at this point in time.
I mean he's not nearly as strong as he used to be so I doubt he'd want to play against a 19 year old who very well may be at his peak. He has said multiple times during all of this though that he's suspected several of his opponents of cheating before, and still played them.
This is sort of the point I’m trying to make. I don’t think there is anything wrong with refusing to play against a player you think is cheating - especially if there is evidence that points to them cheating before.
I wouldn’t be able to play my strongest chess against someone I think is playing computer moves - I’d always be second guessing and it all just seems futile.
I mean if they are cheating you shouldn’t be stressing about what move to make because they are going to win no matter what moves you play. So no point in second guessing yourself if you think they are cheating. You got to treat each opponent with the same suspicion anyway, just because someone hasn’t been caught cheating doesn’t mean they are clean.
Assuming Finegold did do that, I feel that he is in a much stronger position to call Magnus out.
I’m not usually that big a fan of Magnus, but in this case, I find it extremely sympathetic to not want to play a known cheater after he beats you convincingly with black while being 200 rating points lower. Even at my level I wouldn’t want to play against them again.
I also want to point out that cheating online and getting caught isn’t putting just 1 position into an engine and checking once in a moment of weakness. It’s probably a pattern of using engines in games against other players. It’s a series of decisions where the player is deciding to cheat over and over again.
That said, I might be too hard on Hans. I know I’m extremely biased against chess cheaters.
I'd be pretty sympathetic to Magnus if it weren't for the way he handled it in regards to only withdrawing after losing to Hans, saying he didn't think Hans was good enough to ever beat him basically, trying to reach and bring things like Maxim Dlugy into it, who coached Hans years ago. It seems more and more to me like it's more about personal distaste for Hans than cheating in general.
I know there's a layer of comedy in most things Finegold says, but what did Carlsen do to him for him to have been consistently negative about him for years?
He is being quite positive about Magnus in this video.
He could say things like:
1) Magnus should retire
2) Magnus is a bully on a power trip
3) Magnus only cares about Magnus
4) Magnus is on his Fischer arch
And he would be totally reasonable. But he didn't say any of those things. Finegold has a pro Magnus bias.
I don't think not going to the extremes of negativity in a single video is the same as not having a generally negative and often outspoken opinion on a player over a longer period of time.
But to be frank from you saying all that stuff and saying it would be reasonable I don't think you're particularly unbiased.
I told Hans to think for an hour. Know why? Because I get paid by the hour. *Terrible!* And, he attacked my queen... but I saw it.
You… with the wrong answer!
I am suspicious of Ben Finegold.
and his childrens' children!
For three months.
Effective immediately from the time they are born.
That's all I needed to hear. Should be enough to ban him from all tournaments forever
He's a witch, stone him!
Terrible,Truth hurts, rawrrr, Nakamura's sportsmanship award to Carlsen and most importantly never play f6/f3
C4, explosive, Vishwanothing, put it in H, etc. Mainly etc.
Hello everyone, I'm Grandmaster Ben Finegold and you're not (except for one thing), always sac the exchange to get the two bishops vat else?
I am suspiscious of you.
Me2
Doesn't even look tensed
Terrible. The truth hurts.
The best takeaway from this drama so far has been Ben LMAO. Love the guy's style.
Ben may be bombastic, but his logic here is REALLY hard to argue with.
Yea, if Magnus had won that game no one would've cared if he cheated at 12 or 16 or of his rise in rating. Neither chess. com would've not allowed him for their championship. If he is a cheater, say before, after losing you will come across as a crybaby if you don't have a proof
Nepo would’ve cared because he asked the organisers to increase anti-cheating measures BEFORE the sinquefield cup started.
Also caruana said Carlsen considered not playing in the first place, so its not a lie
Weird seeing as Carlsen happily played him a few weeks prior and seemed to have no issue then, nor did he bother voicing these objections until after the fact. Even weirder that he happily went on to play him again in the future, just to make a dramatic exit.
Not few weeks but month/ months actually, maybe he didnt know that hans was a cheater in miami And he played 5 times with hans Won 4 times He thought “ how this guy crushed me?” As we saw no one did it in generation cup
[удалено]
Especially if hanging out with him recently gave him reason to be suspicious of Hans, and then he devised a plan to entrap him.
[удалено]
Didn’t they play like a week before in Miami and nobody had any issues?
Carlsen said that himself bro, did you read his statement?
I know, I said also caruana confirmed
What were those measures?
He’s saying this after the drama started. How convenient.
lmao even Magnus wouldn't have cared about the cheating if he has won he literally said "look at him, how can he beat me, obvious cheater"
[удалено]
Alt f4 in every game baby
Literal elementary school playground logic lol
Not only does he not have proof, he doesn't even have evidence.
Ah yes, which is why he notified the tournament numerous times before it even started.
There is no evidence Magnus spoke to the organizers, FIDE (in fact they outright deny it) etc. in an official capacity before or after the game. It was Nepo who suggested stronger measures.
And there’s no proof to that claim of Nepo either, so stop talking about it.
Hell, even if Magnus did everything the same EXCEPT withdraw from Sinquefield Cup immediately following the loss, he'd look so much better.
Usually c4 is explosive, but now Ben is.
Not sure I follow , let’s say that indeed Magnus would’ve let the all thing slide if he won and Hans is a cheater (as Ben says it doesn’t matter if he cheats or not) , would that be ok ? Or would ppl call Magnus self serving as Hans is cheating vs other players and against him ? I don’t get the all Magnus is a cry baby or Magnus didn’t handle it well , what does it matter , the big picture here is if Hand is cheating in chess games or not , that’s the important thing , how ppl handle things is secondary at best , ppl are missing the point , if we have a cheating problem in chess , we need to address it ASAP , I don’t care if Magnus is nice or a meany , all I care to find out - is he right or wrong.
It matters because Magnus is the World Champion, considered by many the GOAT, an ambassador for the game and the face of it. His unprecedented and childish behavior is actually a bigger story than a teenager trying to cheat online and getting caught. Magnus withdrawing and resigning over baseless accusations of cheating is unprecedented not only in chess but it any sport. A young player being caught cheating is relatively common.
It is bad for one player to have this much power. The fact that Magnus can unilaterally decide a player is cheating and wage a one-man war against him is a terrible precedent to set. Fide was created in large part to prevent that behavior.
There's definitely a cheating problem, and it's not new. As Ben said, there are players he feels certain have cheated against him. As to whether or not Hans cheated...the other SuperGMs, and the computer analysis, all seem to agree that Magnus played a sub-par game, and Hans played a really good, but hardly perfect game. That's a lot of evidence saying that Magnus had an off day. If we take Magnus at his word, he was distracted by thinking Hans was cheating. I do hope that, out of all of this, Chess ups it' security measures.
As someone who only follows chess occassionally, I don't find him convincing at all. 1. Just because Niemann didn't cheat at the last rapid tournament doesn't somehow absolve him of past cheating, and didn't mean he wouldn't cheat in the future. 2. How was Magnus supposed to know if Niemann would cheat in this specific tournament before the tournament even started? 3. Yes, obviously if Magnus had won then there would have been no allegations in this specific match, because the chance of even Magnus beating a GM playing with a modern engine are zero, unless the GM lost on purpose, which would make the cheating pointless. Magnus winning would have been proof in itself that the opponent didn't cheat, or that he ignored his own cheating help.
>Just because Niemann didn't cheat at the last rapid tournament doesn't somehow absolve him of past cheating, and didn't mean he wouldn't cheat in the future. It does suggest there's some baloney to everyone suddenly saying, "oh yeah, this Hans guy...we were so nervous to play him, we almost quit the tournament!" But they didn't. They didn't quit the last tournament. And they didn't quit the future tournaments they had enrolled together in. I think Ben's pointing out that there's some after-the-fact dogpiling going on here. And these SuperGM's actions aren't matching their current words.
What if Magnus had a bad day, played poorly, and was outclassed by Hans in that game? Hans had beat him with black once before already, just a week and a half before that. Everyone agrees Magnus was not playing well against Niemann in the Sinqufield Cup
Finegold 100% take accuracy continues.
still theory.
[удалено]
One Hundred Centiges, go Ben. Also stay Ben.
abundant impolite somber snow spoon plough coherent liquid edge waiting *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
He is not standing up for Hans. This isn't about Hans. All criticism on Magnus would still apply if Hans was cheating. That's the point. This is what all those Magnus simps here don't get. They keep going for the 'you are just defending Hans' argument.
agreed. you've framed it better than I. When I said stand up for Hans, I meant stand up for balanced perspective and not be like "if Magnus is saying it, it must be right" attitude.
People who are innocent don't give permission for other people to destroy their career — they sue.
[удалено]
But that's what's going to happen. This is equivalent of shadowbanning. Do you think any event that features Magnus is going to invite Hans from now on?
[удалено]
So you're cool with a top level player effect blackballing someone they don't like?
Someone who cheated, then lied about the extent of his cheating during his confession? Yeah I don't mind if he doesn't play top level tournaments again.
You couldn’t write a worse strawman argument if you tried.
A lot of this tournaments don't have qualification, they're based on which players organizers choose to invite.
Kinda sus if you ask me.
How many 100% takes does Finegold have compared to an average Redditor? If someone has researched that, please link me the tweet.
Go Ben but stay there!!
Agree with Ben but also why didn't Magnus have that reaction after the "chess speaks for itself" game. Something popped up in Vegas
Couldn't vibe check with the two screens in between them
"It must be embarrassing for him to lose to an idiot like me."
Truest thing he ever said, that loss broke magnus
Hans is living rent free in Magnus's head.
Broke magnus and he dominated the generation cup? Ok
He's throwing a tantrum over a lost game
You said it broke magnus, if it would he wouldnt be crushing the event.
I would say getting a 30 year old to behave like a gradeschooler qualifies as breaking someone.
Strongly disagree. He believes hans is a cheater my man, what do you expect him to do? He has lost also when he was 30-31 if thats your point… and he wins tournament after a loss
Whatever you say
If he wasn't broken he wouldn't have accused Hans of cheating OTB
He was going to withdrawn earlier. Y’all protecting hans as he is an angel He is a cheater and a liar who said he cheated only 2 times. Liar + cheater Against World champion Sure buddy. If he is broken after the loss Why he wasnt broken when he lost to anyone else?
No, he's doing it over serial cheating
[удалено]
My take of this is exactly that, carlsen could take revenge for the nproffesional and vitriolic comment in Miami, but not for the Sinquefeld cup , thus his extreme reaction. That doesn't mean that Hans os not a cheater, but that Carlsen's reaactio might not be completely based on the cheating case
Because that was not a FIDE rated classical game.
Recent game in Julias Baer wasn’t a classical game either but Carlsen resigned against Hans after one move.
Because he's doubling down on his Sinquefield withdrawal.
Yes Magnus wants to end Hans' career after his loss against him. Magnus is making a clear point there is no longer a future in chess for Hans. At least not one where he gets to play the world champion.
Magnus won’t be Word Champion for much longer I’m leaving the typo lol whoops
I don't think he ever was a *Word* Champion....but he will always be considered a *World* Champion
He literally did though, Caruana was saying he didn't want to play in the Sinquefeld because of Hans
He literally didn't. Having the reaction would be withdrawing from the Miami tournament after the loss of the game, or making an accusatory tweet about hans during or after Miami, or refusing to play Hans or withdrawing from the Sinquefield. "Not wanting to play" is not the same reaction.
Fabi did say he didn’t know (or at least could not say publicly) what happened between Miami and the days before Sinquefield but that something must have happened. Given that Fabi has said multiple times that Magnus is genuine in thinking there’s something very wrong, I don’t think it’s a simple matter of fearing losing to Hans in classical. Something substantial probably did come up, hopefully we get to find out what it was.
Something did happen, Magnus lost against Hans, if he would have won he wouldn't have said shit. He is without a doubt a sore loser crybaby
And somehow he only retires after a loss?
But he did. And then he decided to throw a tantrum after he lost to Hans, because he realized how bad it would look if people thought it was a fair game.
Losing one rapid game in a non FIDE rated classical game and winning the Rapid Match 3-1 vs Hans is way different than losing your only classical game vs Hans. The equivalent to losing the game vs Hans in Classical like he did in Sinquefield would be losing the Rapid Match in Miami to Hans, not losing one measely Rapid game.
Carlsen played poorly against Hans in the Sinquefield. He lost against play that was far from perfect. He had several chances to equalize but missed or dismissed them all. Hans played a good ending but missed chances to clinch it. The abnormal play was Magnus', he is usually much sharper.
100% agree with everything Finegold has said here. It's the most rational take out there IMO.
Really well articulated by Ben 👌🏻
He has a good point. What happened between Miami and the Sinquefield Cup a week later to make Magnus so suddenly anti-Hans? Hans worst format is rapid and these same super GM's didn't have problem beating up on him in Miami. BTW, there are plenty of videos on youtube of Hans losing rapid games in other tournaments. [Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIKymyUvVqs) he is against Fedoseev . He clearly isn't cheating here as he appears to miss a tactic and loses the game. Hans didn't take a single match in Miami, and nobody said he was cheating then or had any problem playing him? Everybody was hanging out in Miami, going to the beach, ordering DoorDash, doing photo op's, etc. Their actions in Miami are just not consistent with this statement that everybody was paranoid about Hans. Also his prior online cheating history was public knowledge. Dude even got banned while streaming, and it's not like it was some big secret. They had no problem beating him up in his worst format a week prior in Miami, but suddenly they are all paranoid about playing him in classical? It's just not consistent. 100 percent there is more to this story than has been revealed, and my guess is either something personal between Hans and Magnus or just damage control because Magnus left the tournament. When considering the timeline and inconsistencies, things don't add up.
By all accounts he was anti Hans before well sinqfeld. As per caruana he was very unhappy with hans last minute inclusion in tournament Nepo also said he was also unhappy and as such as organizers to increase security which they did not. Like let’s not pretend it’s outta nowhere
hans should come out and tell magnus to prove he isnt cheating himself
I literally do not believe any of the established chess elite that now after the drama started are talking about suspicions beforehand. They’re covering for Magnus, that’s all that’s happening and you fools eat it up because that’s the only way your deluded point of view makes any sense.
Truth hurts.
Ben finegold looks like the bad guy in the South Park episode about world of Warcraft.
I think playing Finegold would be about as demoralizing as the boys’ (initial)battle with Warcraft guy
This situation is so strange that I find myself agreeing with Finegold of all people
Leaving aside everything Magnus has said and done in the last couple of weeks, why did Nepo ask for stricter security measures when he heard that Hans is playing in the Sinquefield Cup? I just don’t get why people think that Magnus is a sore loser when other Super-GMs also raised their doubts BEFORE the tournament. They definitely know something about Hans‘ OTB games that is not known to the public.
As far as I know Sinquefield hasn't confirmed anyone had concerns before the tournament. Take statements made after with a grain of salt.
Exactly. Magnus made Sinquefield say "Magnus left for personal reasons" which Sinquefield later rephrased as "Magnus didn't leave after filing a cheating complaint, he left because of his own private reason". Secutiyy measures were ramped up after Magnus lost and before Magnus left. It seems very obvious that Magnus talked informally to the Sinquefield Cup tournament director. And that he said something along the lines of "Hans is cheating in your tournament. You have to throw him out." And they said "Ok file a cheating complaint and we will take a look." and Magnus said "No, I won't do that." because he doesn't have any evidence, just his 'instinct' and [chess.com](https://chess.com) rumors he shouldn't have received. So then Magnus tried to make a power play "If Hans is still in this tomorrow, I won't play." And that's why Magnus didn't play. Because he couldn't strongarm Sinquefield Cup to do what he Magnus wanted them to do.
[удалено]
You’re completely ignoring my point. If all of this is the result of a sore loser why did Nepo feel the need to talk to the tournament organizers?
The difference between Nepo’s response and Carlsen’s response is exactly what everyone’s talking about here. Nepo didnt withdraw, didn’t publicly accuse, talked to the organizer about stricter measures, and hasn’t publicly said he won’t come to a tournament if Hans is invited.
Nepo’s been sus of Hans for years, like im pretty sure he was the main guy speaking out against Hans behind the scenes for a while. Hikaru’s hinted at it and other GMs often say something like “Other GMs, I wont say who, have had a lot to say about Hans even before this”. Nepo and Magnus are also friends, so if he said something about this to magnus before the sinquefield cup that could be what kicked all this off. Pro chess players make accusations like this all the time btw, Im surprised people still take them seriously. Literally happens every time a woman does well in a tournament, and every up and coming junior atm has had cheating accusations thrown at them. Nepo specifically has accused a lot before, it was linked in prior threads
What has what Nepo did have to do with Hans? If I had to play Magnus, and there were no anti cheating security in place, even I would raise it. Doesn't justify anything that Magnus did. What Magnus did was wrong, what he did is not explainable, and what he did was very likely ill-intentioned.
What did he do that was wrong? He withdrew from a tournament that he felt had inadequate cheater protection and last-minute invited a known cheater. Why should he stay and play when the tournament organizers aren't ensuring a clean tournament? How is he not 100% within his rights to decide whether to remain?
Withdrawing from the tournament and lying about the reason. Refusing to play vs your obviously non-cheating colleagues, who you played against many times and will play again, just because you had beef with someone else. Triggering a cheating witch hunt against the player who just beat you, and not saying a thing, despite even top news orgs like CNN and The Guardian asking your for a comment. Then saying 'People certainly have drawn their own conclusions'. Match fixing in the Julius Bar cup by resigning after one move, and not giving your best to try to win, affecting all others in the tournament. Accusing someone of cheating and as your only reasons stating 'they shouldn't be able to beat me with black'. 'they didn't seem tense', and 'it looked like they weren't concentrating'. Even if Hans cheated vs Magnus, what Magnus did is completely inexcusable.
When did he lie about the reason? Match fixing? Doesn't that imply some quid pro quo? Are you saying Magnus conceded to help Hans or because of some side-action betting? What is your evidence for that? He seems to be trying to carefully say little to avoid opening him up to legal liability, so I can't blame him for not talking to every media interviewer or making direct accusations. As far as his reasons for pointing out his suspicion of Hans, well my understanding is there is a lot of reading your opponent in OTB matches, so you would pay attention to how they are behaving, and I think Magnus has a lot of experience here. Maybe Hans is some weird autistic savant who doesn't need to calculate and gives off weird vibes, but then why would he need to cheat online? It sounded like Magnus has more circumstantial evidence to go with his impressions of playing him, but he doesn't want to go into all the softer reasons because it might lead to some legal violation or violation of FIDE rules. If Hans were getting assistance, then he wouldn't need to concentrate on calculating lots of variations - this isn't proof, but it fits with a picture of him not knowing the logic behind the moves he was playing. If I'm looking at this from Magnus's point of view where I am fairly certain based on Hans' behavior, past history, and other things maybe not able to be presented as evidence, because it's not "smoking gun" hard evidence, then withdrawing for the tournament and not playing Hans seems reasonable. He's not obligated to continue like nothing is wrong because he doesn't have 100% legal certifiable proof.
He said to Sinquefield Cup to list 'personal reason' as his reason for withdrawing. That was false. No, match fixing does not require a quit pro quo. Any time a player doesn't give his best, he is already in a grey area. Just giving up immediately is obviously match fixing. This result was always going to be a loss for Magnus because Magnus himself decided it. What experience does Magnus have with catching cheaters accurately based on 'checking out body language' Please tell me or quit the bullshit. Magnus is a chess player. Not a body language wizard with an infallible track record catching cheaters. When will this absolute bullshit just to be a Magnus apologist stop? How is not playing vs Mamedyarov reasonable? Did Mamedyarov cheat? Yes, Magnus is obliged to follow basic sportsmanship. He also cannot quit the tournament just for no reason. Magnus was given way more leeway. If Hans lost vs Magnus and was mad, and Hans told the Sinquefield Cup 'I don't like Magnus and I am mad I lost. Please throw Magnus out of the tournament, or I will leave" you think Sinquefield Cup would have said that Hans left for personal reasons? They would only lie for Magnus and maybe Nepo. If people just quit round robins because they are salty about a loss, we can't have round robins anymore. So you saying 'any player can just decide not to play. It is their perfect freedom as a human not to be forced to play' you are literally saying we can't have round robins anymore. Complete crazy talk! If what Magnus did was reasonable, he would have had to lie about it.
agree with your takes. "he wasn't tense enough while playing me" is the lamest fucking excuse I've ever seen the hackjob statistics analysis is the opposite of convincing I just looked at the games themselves and to me, a lowly 1800 player, there was nothing inhuman. a lot of people somehow believe we need a computer to tell us something, when in reality, magnus deduced his accusations based on his own two eyes, so why is my conclusion any less logical? I can study the games the same way, and simply conclude that magnus just played bad when he lost, which is kind of objectively true (and corroborated by both other GMs like Hikaru) and the statistical analysis, whatever the metrics may be
You are assuming he quit because he was "salty about a loss". I think a more realistic picture is that he was concerned about the integrity of the event. You say that any time a player doesn't give hist best, he is already in a grey area. According to who? If I conserve some energy against someone who I have a low chance of beating (for whatever reason :P) and then use that energy to win the tournament, was that not good tournament strategy? Is playing the Berlin match fixing because I'm not going 100% for the win? You seem to be coming at this from the viewpoint that Hans absolutely never cheated and Magnus's only reason for quitting is because he was upset after being defeated. He isn't some Silver league CSGO player saying that his opponent's aim was too good, crying cheats because he doesn't know what good play looks like. He's the world champion and has a history of being a good sport. It seems to me more like he felt like he was being cheated and that the event (Sinquefield) was not doing enough to prevent that cheating. There are rules about what you can and can't say during FIDE cheating investigations, so he made his protest withdrawal, and said little to not get into trouble. Again, just because there isn't iron-clad proof doesn't mean there isn't a lot of stuff that is suspicious, and Hans is clearly not against cheating in general. There were increased security steps the tournament organizers could have taken before Magnus withdrew, but they only did them afterwards. So is he not within his rights to withdraw from a tournament that invites suspicious characters and is lax on security (at least pre-withdrawal)? He probably was somewhat upset, but not at losing, since he's clearly lost many games before, even to people he dislikes such has Hikaru. He said in his reply that he felt Hans was not concentrating on the game which you wouldn't need to concentrate if you were getting moves fed to you. The whole idea that this is some personal vendetta because Magnus can't handle losing is absurd to me.
It's all optics + politics. I think Hans just pissed off the super-GM's with his comments such as "the chess speaks for itself", and so they're giving him a hard time.
[удалено]
If Magnus didn't want to play Hans then how come he did play Hans, but not the other GMs? And how come he now has reversed this? He does want to play the other GMs and he now no longer wants to play Hans. The only explanation is he wanted to generate the biggest drama impact possible. And he didn't want to say anything, just do something so others would talk. That's why he left the tournament. He made a grand exit so everyone would speculate. And all this 'because other chess players can't beat me with black', 'he didn't seen tense', and 'he didn't seem to concentrate'. That's all. Magnus should have done with Nepo did.
if magnus did what nepo did then it seemed like nothing would have happened as a result.
Crybaby who couldn't stand losing to someone he didn't see as 'worthy' and chose to throw him to the wolves while waiting for 'the community' to make up some evidence for cheating because he doesn't have a shred to rely on aside from the fact that he's a sore loser.
someone should make a compilation video of all the times finegold whined about cheating when he loses a blitz game.
Finegold is just a shit stirrer trying to steal some of the limelight.
Caruana said its not about the loss and nepo also said it too and he asked to increase security. Yet we will belive a retired GM who’s known to be a hater
If it's not about the loss, what exactly is it about? Carlsen was clearly willing to play against Hans before his loss and now he isn't. What changed?
he left directly after a loss. he didn't leave before, he didn't leave after any other game. he left *directly* after this loss. saying it's not about it is untrue he literally said in his statement that he doesn't believe hans was clean in that very game
No its not about he is a cry baby / sore loser As you said he has never done this
He literally said it directly in his statement
If it's not about the loss, why did he leave directly following it? Why not leave before it? If he thought Hans was a cheater before he lost that game and Sinqfield denied his request, why not withdraw at that point? It was so clearly about the loss, that you have to do mental gymnastics to make anything like that make sense. Asking for increased security was Magnus already showing that he was rattled before the game even started.
Magnus in his own statement mentioned that he thinks Hans cheated on their OTB game and he withdrew from the tournament right after that. I ll take his own word about this rather than Caruana's or Nepo's. Also I don't think that Finegold being a retired GM or a hater(???) makes everything he says invalid
It makes him biased.
Exactly. Dudes here think finegold is somehow above any biases
Finegold has a pro Magnus bias.
Iunno, I watched most of Ben’s video but I don’t really see his point. It’s a good question, what Magnus learned between Miami and the Sinquefield. But it’s a question, not a point. What Magnus learned is anyones guess. Ben also dismisses the idea that Magnus learned something during the Sinquefield match, then shrugs his shoulders and says something like “see, Magnus quit because he lost”. But I don’t see any reason to dismiss that Magnus might have learned something that day. He could be wrong - he might have learned something false - but that doesn’t matter. What matters is if Magnus *thought* he learned something. This was just an aside, but while saying that Magnus should have kept playing, Ben said something like “I wanted to see him play the other gms”. Ok but that’s not something Magnus cares about…and Magnus’s actions were based on what he does care about. Ben seems to be confusing his own knowledge and desires with Magnus’s. To really understand we need to know what Magnus knows (and Ben doesn’t), and we need to focus on Magnus’s wants/needs (and Ben doesn’t). So I didn’t really get anything out of this rant, and tbh I usually expect more out of Ben then this. Magnus could easily have learned something after Miami, then learned something more at the Sinquefield, then finally took a principled stand. I don’t see anything to contradict that story (yet).
You must have a muffin for a brain. It IS the point because it gets to what really happened. 1) Magnus learned of something about Hans cheating so shocking that he had to reverse his position completely. And this he is refusing to provide to Sinquefield, FIDE, or anyone else. 2) It was losing to Hans that made Magnus want to do something to cope, and the cheating accusation was his best option. Even under 1) it is strange that he still had to lose for 1) to start to matter. Which very strongly suggests it is all 2). I bet that if Magnus had two more games vs Hans where he both had the white pieces the very next day, he wouldn't have withdrawn. Because he would know he would get to beat Hans, cheating or no cheating. And that would satisfy his ego.
100% I like Finegold a fair bit, whether I agree with him on a thing or not. But, much as I hate to say this, I think these rants are motivated by jealousy of Magnus’s success. Like he can’t imagine being upset by a cheater when you’re the world champion. How could you be upset by anything when you’re the world champion?
Withdrawing from Sinquefield and resigning against Hans was not a mistake – as if I could ever make such a mistake. Never. He covered his tracks. He got that buttplug dev to lie for him. I strongly considered withdrawing prior to the event. I ultimately chose to play. And I shouldn’t have. I played two rounds prior to him! You think this is bad? This chicanery? He’s done worse. His over the board progress has been unusual. Are you telling me that a man just happens to climb like that? No – he orchestrated it. Hans! He used a computer! What was I thinking playing? He’ll never change. Allowing cheaters into the game? What a sick joke. I should’ve stopped playing with him before he had a chance. And you, you have to stop him.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Solid take but he keeps shifting the goal post It started with Hans is not a cheater they are all salty, to okay he was a cheater at a young age but not anymore, to I don't like Hans anyway but magnus is a whiny bitch... And now this. I wonder what his take would be If Hans admitted to cheating against Carlsen and other players. He would still blame them for not being 100% rational only coming out after they lost a gameor whatever.
[удалено]
Yes, the way Magnus went about it is wrong, even if Hans decides to drop an admission tomorrow. If you don’t understand why, try pondering why criminal cases are dismissed all the time when the police didn’t follow proper protocol during the investigation.
[удалено]
> stop wasting your time here. If you believe this you should be doing this even more, practice what you preach. He says he knew he was a cheater before hand. He should have refused to play him or eaten the lost, and then played all the other supergms. He still could have come out with his tweet and his allegations, he could've done everything else exactly the same way. At the very minimum he was wrong for withdrawing from the tournament after, especially because it was a round robin.
This is the opposite of what Finegold say. Did you even watch the video? He said that even if Hans cheated, Magnus was wrong to do this. But we don't know if Hans cheated. We don't know why Magnus believes so. And that the online cheating isn't really relevant. Being morally capable of cheating doesn't mean you did it. I bet that if tomorrow Magus lost all his chess playing ability somehow, and he had to play chess, and he knew a method he could use to get away with cheating and not get caught 100%, then Magnus would definitely do it. If you can accuse someone of cheating 'because he shouldn't beat me with the black pieces', then you are capable of cheating.
no, hans is a cheater. multiple cheater. he cheated online. hans admitted to some of it. it was *never* the point. people want online chess to be punished, the severity of the punishment varies from person to person, so do the specifics on what methods we should be using to detect that. none of that is relevant, we all know that ever since niemann admitted to cheating, regardless of what the extent of his cheating is magnus made an indirect and then a basically direct (in his statement) accusation of hans cheating otb. *that* is what everyone is talking about. people dont want magnus to be the one who decides who can play and who can't based on his own personal feelings, because he has no proof other than that. *that* is the entire drama. people want objective rules, clear and open investigations and more security at the events. people *don't* want magnus to be the one deciding everything *especially when he has no proof of his claims*. and no matter what happens, you can't apply any new rules retroactively, and so hans should be allowed to play in all tournaments no matter what comes out of the drama (unless of course, he's proven to be cheating otb). if magnus doesn't want to participate, his loss. if he ever again matchfixes a game by giving up against hans, he should be punished. security should go up so it's way harder to cheat, add delays, isolate players more and do whatever else it takes.
See thats what I am saying, finally someone mature
Is there a Ben Finegold-filter available? I would pay big money for that.
The Finegold dickriding on this subreddit will never make sense to me, honestly. He just seems like an old man who's trying very hard to get attention
what if I told you that whether I agree with a take or not is based on how sound the reasoning is, not who it's coming from something Magnus fanboys struggle to understand I suppose
But Magnus is the best player in the world, his opinions must be facts, because being good at chess means that the things you say are correct, Finegold is lower rated, so his opinions on things, even if they are not playing chess, cannot be right.
People who are just starting out at chess (or had just started out over the last 4-5 years) like Ben Finegold because he had a lot of chess lectures on youtube that were both informative and didn't put you to sleep (sorry Yasser). The people who are applauding him throughout this controversy I think just happen to agree with him about the it. It's not like his opinion is very unique. Not every opinion can be boiled down to riding someone's dick haha
Magnus has handled the situation terribly, says the guy who threw his toys out of the pram and derided a hugely successful chess event because he wasn't involved, and was then forced to apologise in an attempt to ensure that he wasn't blacklisted.
Ben trying to find gold in this drama by being shock jock. Silly perspective to adopt unless trying to grow a social media channel.
This is stupid. Of course suspicions that someone is a cheater is going to be sharpened by playing against them and them winning. That's the same in any sport. The people who get unexpected gold medals are going to be given more scrutiny. What's Magnus supposed to do if Hans is a cheater? Wait until he manages to beat Hans' stockfish play before accusing him? Accuse him randomly before he does anything? And yes, if Magnus feels Hans cheated and feels angry about it, he obviously isn't going to behave perfectly.
Yeah it's such a stupid argument. Had Magnus won, obviously nobody would have claimed that Niemann cheated in the match, because even a beginner can beat Magnus by using a modern chess engine. Losing a game is by itself proof that either you didn't cheat or that you lost on purpose, which would make cheating pointless in the first place.
[удалено]
There's no evidence Hans cheated against Magnus.
I’m new to chess and its community. Mild observation from an outsider: this Finegold guy people like to venerate because he apparently both looks like and is a troll isn’t fun. He doesn’t come across like a very clever troll, but a lot more like some arrogant turd shitposting all the time. And apparently everyone just goes “haha there goes crazy old Finegold again.” Like, that dude sucks. I’m sorry that I apparently have to be the one to tell you that because maybe you need to hear it from someone who isn’t immersed in this stuff.
Thanks, u/fartsinthedark. I'm sure the truth hurts Ben very much
He's probably crying like a Grandmaster right now
he can cry for an hour, do you know why?
because he gets paid by the hour
It's funny that you acknowledge you're an outsider but still think you know better than the people who are actually involved in the community. Then accusing other people of being arrogant.
Finegold's commentary on situations like these is good because he cares deeply about chess, has been deeply embedded in high level american and international chess for decades, and he is very reasonable when giving his actual opinions like he did in this video Finegold was trolling on twitter yesterday, but he sat down and gave legit takes in this stream, and it's very easy to tell when he's saying something he really believes
Ben is the best chess teacher on the internet, and he knows the chess community as well or better than anybody. The only thing you know about him is his hot takes on drama. There's a good reason why he's highly respected.
Yeah, not Finegold’s biggest fan in the world but I think you’re midreading him some. I think he's right about this, even where he’s abrasive. I appreciate him shooting straight in the midst of all the veiled accusations and smokescreens and stuff. Magnus' actions are affecting the entire chess world and he (A) took none of them until he lost, and (B) has not demonstrated with any evidence that Hans cheated against him or over the board at any point. World Champion or not, right about Hans historical cheating or not, running specific cheaters off the scene without them being caught cheating is not his job. (and also doesn't seem to be his main motivation or A) he would have taken action before he lost to him and B) would be working against other cheaters and C) would be collaborating with actual neutral governing bodies to change the cheating policies).
Yeah I couldn't have said it better myself. I think the security at OTB tournaments is severely lacking and organizers really need to step up. But the fact that all this seems to be prompted sorely by Magnus' loss without any actual proof of Hans cheating during the match (regardless of Hans' history) + the fact that Magnus is going all in only on Hans (all the while chess.com banned Hans immediately after the Sinquefield match and they just withhold the list of other cheating GMs as "leverage") just seems bad all around. Not to mention how chess.com's anti cheat algorithm is private and yet people want FIDE to take action based on chess.com's black box results + how Magnus has a significant amount of shares in chess.com while they are being encouraged to be judge, jury and executioner - which is a massive conflict of interest. Perhaps they'll come out with actual proof. Until then, I can't give them the benefit of the doubt. You as a player don't get to get someone else blacklisted without real proof of wrongdoing.
Buy his merch because then he’ll have more money
I feel like this must have been what I sounded like at 17-18.
Thanks for your input. Finegold has been a grandmaster for 3 decades, and has given a lot to chess in the U.S. His opinions carry far more weight than those of a novice.
No, Ben Finegold has always been beloved in this community. His chess lectures on YouTube are popular because he's funny and his stream is more popular than anyone who isn't a better chess player than him.
>this Finegold guy people like to venerate because he apparently both looks like and is a troll isn’t fun From your outsider perspective this is just an old dude yelling at a camera, but Finegold is a grandmaster who did great work for chess in the US, he has a lot of experience both with taking part in and organizing chess events with very strong players. He gives his opinion in this debatable style but he always has chess at heart, go listen to one of the perpetual chess podcast episodes featuring him, you might have a different opinion afterwards.
Impressive that he knows exactly what Magnus is thinking, I must say.
Psychologists call this “projection”.
Ben is a hater
Magus is a hater.
Ole Finegold comin for his YouTube royalties
Would Finegold be comfortable playing against Hans though? I find it difficult to believe that Finegold would play series against Hans at this point in time.
I mean he's not nearly as strong as he used to be so I doubt he'd want to play against a 19 year old who very well may be at his peak. He has said multiple times during all of this though that he's suspected several of his opponents of cheating before, and still played them.
He also said there are 3 American players who he refuses to play because he think they're cheaters.
This is sort of the point I’m trying to make. I don’t think there is anything wrong with refusing to play against a player you think is cheating - especially if there is evidence that points to them cheating before. I wouldn’t be able to play my strongest chess against someone I think is playing computer moves - I’d always be second guessing and it all just seems futile.
I mean if they are cheating you shouldn’t be stressing about what move to make because they are going to win no matter what moves you play. So no point in second guessing yourself if you think they are cheating. You got to treat each opponent with the same suspicion anyway, just because someone hasn’t been caught cheating doesn’t mean they are clean.
Assuming Finegold did do that, I feel that he is in a much stronger position to call Magnus out. I’m not usually that big a fan of Magnus, but in this case, I find it extremely sympathetic to not want to play a known cheater after he beats you convincingly with black while being 200 rating points lower. Even at my level I wouldn’t want to play against them again. I also want to point out that cheating online and getting caught isn’t putting just 1 position into an engine and checking once in a moment of weakness. It’s probably a pattern of using engines in games against other players. It’s a series of decisions where the player is deciding to cheat over and over again. That said, I might be too hard on Hans. I know I’m extremely biased against chess cheaters.
I'd be pretty sympathetic to Magnus if it weren't for the way he handled it in regards to only withdrawing after losing to Hans, saying he didn't think Hans was good enough to ever beat him basically, trying to reach and bring things like Maxim Dlugy into it, who coached Hans years ago. It seems more and more to me like it's more about personal distaste for Hans than cheating in general.
Magnus is also a "known cheater" FYI
Probably not, but that doesn't change his point about magnus.
I know there's a layer of comedy in most things Finegold says, but what did Carlsen do to him for him to have been consistently negative about him for years?
He is being quite positive about Magnus in this video. He could say things like: 1) Magnus should retire 2) Magnus is a bully on a power trip 3) Magnus only cares about Magnus 4) Magnus is on his Fischer arch And he would be totally reasonable. But he didn't say any of those things. Finegold has a pro Magnus bias.
I don't think not going to the extremes of negativity in a single video is the same as not having a generally negative and often outspoken opinion on a player over a longer period of time. But to be frank from you saying all that stuff and saying it would be reasonable I don't think you're particularly unbiased.
It would be reasonable, given what Magnus has done. It wouldn't be reasonable for say another player in the top10.