Carlsen resigns on move 2

[JustinHorton]

If Hans has nothing to hide then he should agree.

This is just nonsense, isn't it? He's not going to give Magnus a free hand in advance to say anything he chooses.

I'm not at all opposed to Keith's view that strong players have a sense for when something's wrong - there has to be something substantial in this. But I do also think this sense can be mistaken. (Isn't Mamedyarov/Kursonov an example of this?)

[Jon Tait]

I think you are getting hans confused with this guy https://twitter.com/pacificwondrlnd/sta ... 09/photo/1 who is a known troll who tries to get everyone to block him. I deliberately have not blocked him so as not to play his game.

yes, just Mute them, let them shout into the void

[MJMcCready]

It's poor argumentation by Carlsen, and convicting enough for Niemann to sue him I would have thought. With no evidence in play, I'm sorry but Carlsen seems like a sore loser here. They were doing a promo shoot in Miami together just weeks ago. Unconvincing stuff by the world champ.

[JustinHorton]

Tweet from Magnus: https://twitter.com/MagnusCarlsen/statu ... 88/photo/1

He's said it - he really is claiming that Hans cheated against him in that OTB game. They're off!

I can't see any other construction that can be put upon that paragraph - at the very very least it's what a reasonable person would infer (if not, why the bit about "outplaying me as black"?).

I don't want to draw too large a conclusion from a couple of tweets, but some people at least seem to find it a disappointing statement - they were maybe expecting some kind of chunky empirical or analytical back-up.

[Matt Bridgeman]

I see the saga now has a growing Wiki page; https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlsen ... ontroversy

As an uneducated guess, if you were to profile the type of person likely to make a concerted effort to cheat their way into the upper echelons of OTB chess - would you get a teenager who repeatedly cheated online to get a higher rating/bigger following, someone very social isolated, with that single-minded want everything yesterday mentality? One for the psychologists maybe.

Also, there’s probably a total coincidence that Hans has around the same rating as Rausis when his world imploded. Just a weird parallel I’d guess.

[NickFaulks]

(Isn't Mamedyarov/Kursonov an example of this?)

Yes, definitive and not the only one.

[Roger de Coverly]

Yes, definitive and not the only one.

This was the game. It's an example of a GM losing quickly with the White pieces. It's the risk you take if you try an early mating attack with White in a messy position.

https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1535893

Kurnosov left the board during the game which increased his vulnerability to false accusations.

[Matt Bridgeman]

Have we had this one posted yet - an ingestible small chess computer coated in silicone. Buzzes moves but would need an accomplice. Took him 24 hours to make and could easily be more refined; https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IoI7B5vQe ... e=youtu.be

[Roger de Coverly]

Have we had this one posted yet - an ingestible small chess computer coated in silicone. Buzzes moves but would need an accomplice.

We have. Doesn't "would need an accomplice" rule out using such a method at elite events? Still if players are paranoid, they could consider watching arbiters for dubious behaviour as they may well be the only people with access to computers, in sight of players and probably not screened or searched before admission.

Another thought on this. Wireless (as opposed to wired) DGT boards are becoming increasingly common. Are they a security risk, given that a malevolent device could listen in to find out the moves being played? But that's a matter of the security or otherwise of the local wifi network.

[Geoff Chandler]

If Hans has nothing to hide then he should agree.

This is just nonsense, isn't it?

Hi Justin,

I was trying to make sense of that statement and that is all I can see.
Magnus wants permission to elaborate further. If Hans says No.
Magnus can stop there and need not give an explanation and because Hans
said no people will draw their own conclusions. (or something like that.)

A players reaction and knowing something is wrong is without doubt the best method
of bringing an OTB cheat to notice. A complaint from a player to an arbiter suspecting
his opponent is cheating has to deal with right away. And this is the path Magnus should have taken.

You are correct that OTB cheating can go unnoticed.
OTB cheats have been out and about without attracting attention to themselves,
it is only when something odd catches a players eye or the cheat does something amazing
like beat a World Champion whilst sporting a 2600 grade does eyebrows raise.

Is Hans is that stupid to have done that in his OTB game v Magnus and thought he
could get away with it? Or was it a double bluff, ‘I’ll cheat in this game because
no one will think I’d be daft enough too.’

The game by all (most) accounts appears to be clean.
If Carlsen sensed Hans was cheating, and I believe him, backed with his reluctance to
play him in the first place, this could have affected his play and led to some poor decisions.
Regarding poor decisions I'll bring in Karpov who I doubt has any personal interest in this either way.
Karpov appears to be puzzled at Magnus’s play but does not suspect cheating until it is proven other wise.

“I reject all versions of an unfair win. Of course we can't say with certainty that Niemann didn't cheat, but Carlsen surprisingly played the opening so badly with white that he automatically got into a worse position. But then he showed a strange inability to cope with the difficult situation that arose on the board"

https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments ... ely_badly/

But that was said 20 odd days ago. A lot of new things have surfaced since then. In light of this
Karpov’s opinion on cheating may have changed, but will his evaluation of the game also change.
Magnus played below par.

The 'strange inability to cope' was possibly (we must also consider an off day) due to Magnus thinking something
odd was going on And I believe him if says he thought there was. But it appears he picked up the wrong vibes,
or picked up the vibes he was expecting to pick up.

And as crazy it as it sounds (and you can trust in me to find the crazy answers, I'll never let you down.)
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.

[JustinHorton]

Is there an executive summary

[Matt Mackenzie]

I see the saga now has a growing Wiki page; https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlsen ... ontroversy

As an uneducated guess, if you were to profile the type of person likely to make a concerted effort to cheat their way into the upper echelons of OTB chess - would you get a teenager who repeatedly cheated online to get a higher rating/bigger following, someone very social isolated, with that single-minded want everything yesterday mentality? One for the psychologists maybe.

Also, there’s probably a total coincidence that Hans has around the same rating as Rausis when his world imploded. Just a weird parallel I’d guess.

Niemann isn't an established player who somehow became stronger than ever before at an age when most are on at least a gentle decline.

Apart from that, totally spot on and relevant comparison

(and the "he's a cheat" people like to claim HMN's recent improvement was "unprecedented" - in fact its anything but)

[Matt Bridgeman]

I see the saga now has a growing Wiki page; https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlsen ... ontroversy

As an uneducated guess, if you were to profile the type of person likely to make a concerted effort to cheat their way into the upper echelons of OTB chess - would you get a teenager who repeatedly cheated online to get a higher rating/bigger following, someone very social isolated, with that single-minded want everything yesterday mentality? One for the psychologists maybe.

Also, there’s probably a total coincidence that Hans has around the same rating as Rausis when his world imploded. Just a weird parallel I’d guess.

Niemann isn't an established player who somehow became stronger than ever before at an age when most are on at least a gentle decline.

Apart from that, totally spot on and relevant comparison

(and the "he's a cheat" people like to claim HMN's recent improvement was "unprecedented" - in fact its anything but)

At some point there will probably be a shift away from the Carlsen game to the tournaments Hans used to increase his rating from 2500 to nearly 2700. Perhaps other former opponents will come forward with their own experiences?

[Geoff Chandler]

Ha-Ha! I bet I’m the relatively weak player with anti cheating methods Keith mentions.
Fair enough. I’ve have no problem with that.
(why do you think I had to use Karpov to spot poor decisions – see my previous post.)

I was on a cheat detecting team at RHP years ago. We only looked at correspondence games
and in the vast majority of the cases had no idea who was who? One game was never enough.
I was only reassuring Roger, based on what Roger posted, he would be OK.

If they used just your game Keith I might be surprised though a play to finished online
game is something I’ve never been involved with. In correspondence chess you have
days to make a move, this is why you need more than one game.

Did the arbiter act alone or did he ask chess.com to have a quick look.
He could have acted alone knowing the other insinuating circumstances.
The culprit had no FIDE rating, no OTB games that anyone knew about within
at least 10 years and was wiping the floor with his opponents.
Also the timing of his replies (a regular pattern – yes?) and, I’ll take a guess, he was
challenged and confessed. I take it there no was appeal.
The important thing is justice prevailed.

[Matt Mackenzie]

I see the saga now has a growing Wiki page; https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlsen ... ontroversy

As an uneducated guess, if you were to profile the type of person likely to make a concerted effort to cheat their way into the upper echelons of OTB chess - would you get a teenager who repeatedly cheated online to get a higher rating/bigger following, someone very social isolated, with that single-minded want everything yesterday mentality? One for the psychologists maybe.

Also, there’s probably a total coincidence that Hans has around the same rating as Rausis when his world imploded. Just a weird parallel I’d guess.

Niemann isn't an established player who somehow became stronger than ever before at an age when most are on at least a gentle decline.

Apart from that, totally spot on and relevant comparison

(and the "he's a cheat" people like to claim HMN's recent improvement was "unprecedented" - in fact its anything but)

At some point there will probably be a shift away from the Carlsen game to the tournaments Hans used to increase his rating from 2500 to nearly 2700. Perhaps other former opponents will come forward with their own experiences?

Again, you say this as if no young players have ever improved rapidly from 2500 to 2700 level (or similar) before.

Do you regard this, in itself, as evidence of cheating?