Carlsen resigns on move 2

[Paul Heaton]

Well it's weird isn't it? We discussed above that circulating the "blackmail list" seemed to entail sharing information that might be confidential between chessdotcom and the account-holder, so maybe it does require permission to be shared, in which case perhaps names shouldn't have been circulated? But that's too many perhapses.

“Explicit permission”, as per Carlsen’s notice, is a common phrase in GDPR

[Tim Harding]

...
How about Hans knew Magnus thought he was a cheat so acted at the board like he was cheating to put him off.
When you think about that would explain a lot. A clean game, a furious Magnus, no evidence at all that
Hans cheated and James Bond speculation how it was done. (it wasn't, it only appears to have been done.)

Hans was guilty of deliberately distracting an opponent during a game.
Solution: scrub the result, remove and give back the rating points.

I was watching the game pretty much throughout and Hans's interview afterwards.
I saw nothing to suggest that Hans was doing anything to put Magnus off. Nor anything to suggest that Hans thought Magnus suspected him of cheating.
I saw Niemann play well, but not perfectly (as the commentators showed at a few points) and I saw a spoiled kid named Magnus playing badly and acting really pissed off near the end when he knew he was going to lose.

Magnus Carlsen has now escalated the situation by claiming, in effect if not quite explicitly, that Niemann may have cheated during this game.

He has still failed to produce any evidence.
Failing proof of his allegations and insinuations, it still seems to me that Carlsen is abusing his position as world champion and a person with an over-large financial stake in chess businesses.
His attempts to destroy Niemann's career reflect very badly on Carlsen if he has no proof he is willing or able to make public.

I look forward to seeing Niemann's games in the US Championship. I don't particularly want to see Magnus Carlsen play again, ever.

[Paul Cooksey]

.

[JustinHorton]

Mmm, but if that's the case then that's something that should have been acted on at the time, no? Retrospective justice isn't justice.

[Paul Cooksey]

.

[JustinHorton]

I think normally that sort of sentiment is for when rules have been changed retrospectively.

But banning a player from OTB for online cheating would be precisely that, no?

[MartinCarpenter]

I think normally that sort of sentiment is for when rules have been changed retrospectively.

But banning a player from OTB for online cheating would be precisely that, no?

I really don't know - there's huge questions about the standard of proof you'd like etc.

But as I noted above, there's a big percentage of real, high stakes chess online these days. I don't see how you can have a top player banned from one and not the other.

Best case you destroy the credibility of the online play. Difficult.

[JustinHorton]

Martin - my point was specifically about the potential banning of Niemann, not the question in general.

[Paul Cooksey]

.

[Geoff Chandler]

Hi Tim,

It was my turn in the great guessing game of what is going on. I thought though highly unlikely
this would have been a way to wrap this up.
I'm climbing back on the fence. I've been on both sides now, back and forth, back and forth and the
grass always looked greener on the other side, so I jumped the fence only to discover...Astro turf!

But all this has allowed me to discover something brilliant. I simply love discovering things like this.
I was thinking the next step in the Carlsen - Niemann affair is obliviously lie detectors so I did a bit of research.

Enter 'William Moulton Marston' who invented the lie detector and he also created the character 'Wonder Woman'


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Moulton_Marston

Can you spot the subconscious link? The lie detector and Wonder Woman's lasso,
if she traps you with her lasso you are forced to tell the truth! You could not make that up but it's true.

[Stephen Westmoreland]

Some of this comes back to how we want to be as a society. Do we offer redemption and rehabilitation? Or never forgive.

Is the kid correct about online cheating at 12 and 16 only and not to financial benefit? Or has this continued? Or has Carlsen sacrificed he queen for no benefit?

[Roger de Coverly]

A round-up in the Guardian by Sean Ingle

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/ ... s-cheating

[Kirk Gornall]

A round-up in the Guardian by Sean Ingle

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/ ... s-cheating

Interesting article. I wish this story will have a conclusion soon and not drag on for months. This latest analysis looking at the games of Hans where there is 100% move correlation with the engines is interesting. I don't think it proves definitively that Hans is cheating though in OTB games. I will be interested to see what Ken Regan makes of this, as he had previously cleared Hans of any cheating in the last two years. The whole thing is a complete mess and we need some resolution to this soon.

[Paul Habershon]

Radio 5 Live last night (Tues. 27 Sept.), just before 11 p.m., I heard Sabrina Chevannes being interviewed by Colin Murray. Don't know for how long, but it's probably available on iPlayer. He wanted Carlsen-Niemann to appear together on his show and asked Sabrina to mention it to them.

[Chris Rice]

Here's a link https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001cgf6 to the interview with Sabrina. It's 51 minutes in and lasts for nine minutes. Sabrina basically clarifies the state of affairs at the moment and there is nothing new to add to what we already know from what's been discussed on this thread although at the end Colin Murray issues an invitation for Niemann and Carlsen to both come on the show separately or together to discuss further.