Carlsen resigns on move 2

[Paul Cooksey]

Niemann suing apparently:

https://twitter.com/ollie/status/1583154134504525824

[JustinHorton]

In re: the potential legal action Dlugy talks about, I'll believe it when I see it, either from him or from Niemann.

Time to believe it I guess.

Just a thought - will this inhibit the publication of the FIDE report?

[LawrenceCooper]

Niemann suing apparently:

https://twitter.com/ollie/status/1583154134504525824

"Niemann seeks damages in an amount to be determined at trial, but no less than One Hundred Million Dollars ($100,000,000)."
https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments ... st_magnus/

[Stephen Westmoreland]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.indepe ... html%3famp

If not settled out of court, this will be fascinating. Damaging to chess though.

[Roger de Coverly]

Damaging to chess though.

It's in the tabloid press complete with the obiligatory reference to beads,

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -100M.html

[Angus French]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.indepe ... html%3famp

If not settled out of court, this will be fascinating. Damaging to chess though.

I think it's already damaging to chess in general - and Hans Niemann in particular. Presumably if it does get to court Magnus Carlsen will be called on to justify his allegation and the chess.com report and statements will be scrutinised in detail. Might David Sedgwick - as chief arbiter(?) for the Sinquefield Cup and involved in discussions with Magnus Carlsen pre his withdrawal - be asked to provide evidence? I wonder what Rex Sinquefield makes of all this?

[Roger de Coverly]

the chess.com report and statements will be scrutinised in detail

If chess.com have to substantiate their claim of cheating in over a hundred games, are they likely to have to reveal their methods of investigation and the conclusions they draw to the court?

[JustinHorton]

Incidentally the legal deposition incorrectly dates Carlsen's Mourinho tweet, locating it in 2020

[NickFaulks]

If not settled out of court, this will be fascinating.

I really hope it isn't. For the survival of the game, Carlsenchess.com must be clearly found guilty, nothing less will do.

[Ian Thompson]

Niemann suing apparently:

https://twitter.com/ollie/status/1583154134504525824

Here's the court deposition - http://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/ ... 08.1.0.pdf.

Some claims it makes are clearly incorrect, but what is the value of chess.com? It being a "multi-billion-dollar behemoth" seems unlikely.

[Richard Bates]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.indepe ... html%3famp

If not settled out of court, this will be fascinating. Damaging to chess though.

I think it's already damaging to chess in general - and Hans Niemann in particular. Presumably if it does get to court Magnus Carlsen will be called on to justify his allegation and the chess.com report and statements will be scrutinised in detail. Might David Sedgwick - as chief arbiter(?) for the Sinquefield Cup and involved in discussions with Magnus Carlsen pre his withdrawal - be asked to provide evidence? I wonder what Rex Sinquefield makes of all this?

I think US defamation law works very differently to how people understand it in other countries esp. the U.K. The person suing really has to demonstrate a high standard of evidence because of US free speech laws. As I understand it, in a case of this type, Niemann has to basically establish that Carlsen (and/or Chess.com or other defendants) doesn’t believe he was cheating. Carlsen doesn’t have to prove that he was, Niemann has to prove that Carlsen doesn’t think that he was/knows that he wasn’t.

If you think Carlsen etc are genuine in their belief (even if you disagree and/or disagree that he should have made that belief public) then Niemann loses.

[Geoff Chandler]

The wording of the claim (are we sure this is not a hoax)

"8. Notorious for his inability to cope with defeat, Carlsen snapped. Enraged that the young Niemann, fully 12 years his junior, dared to disrespect the “King of Chess,” and fearful that the young prodigy would further blemish his multi-million dollar brand by beating him again, Carlsen viciously and maliciously retaliated against Niemann by falsely accusing Niemann, without any evidence, of somehow cheating during their in-person game and demanding that the organizers of the Sinquefield Cup immediately disqualify Niemann from the tournament.

9. When tournament officials refused to comply with Carlsen’s corrupt and cowardly demand to baselessly eliminate Niemann from competition, Carlsen lashed out again, this time by boycotting the remainder of the Sinquefield Cup in protest..."

Did Magnus really demand that Hans be thrown out of the tournament?

(David and do not answer my hypothetical question but I figure you already know it's best to stay out of it.)

[Roger de Coverly]

Did Magnus really demand that Hans be thrown out of the tournament?

If it comes to trial, I suppose the officials will be asked for evidence.

chess.com seemed to cast doubt over the legitimacy of Hans' OTB rating. Isn't that one of their weakest areas, as it seems he is outscoring by a point a tournament? If you play in three tournaments in a month that's 30 Elo, but that's down to the number of games played not elapsed time. The Elo overshoot effect may be there as well.

I thought the claim that Hans played better in tournaments with live boards had been shown to be based on false data. A reader comment at chessbase repeats it as fact.

https://en.chessbase.com/post/breaking- ... n-is-suing

I think it's clear from interviews that Hans has a detail understanding of positions and ideas that arise just after the opening. That's stuff he knows inside out, not stuff he recently learned during a game.

Leonard Barden in the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/ ... t-st-louis

[NickFaulks]

I think it's clear from interviews that Hans has a detail understanding of positions and ideas that arise just after the opening.

Absolutely. When not facing an inquisition by a little dirtbag trying to trip him up with computer lines, those interviews are quite superb.

[NickFaulks]

If you think Carlsen etc are genuine in their belief (even if you disagree and/or disagree that he should have made that belief public) then Niemann loses.

Sorry, nothing in US law is as simple as that.