Carlsen resigns on move 2

[David Williams]

How is otb cheating done? I have no idea! I am at the basic level of detection whereby if my opponent starts going to the loo every move then I start to feel uneasy. There have been a few opponents who clearly found a way of doing it while remaining at the board. I can usually tell by their body language as well as their moves, but, just like Magnus, if I say anything I risk getting into trouble.

If I'm playing someone significantly better than me, and I can see the game beginning to slip away, I may well play something that is purely speculative. I try to do it without making it look like desperation. My thinking is that if my opponent was playing someone of equal strength he would play what he objectively thinks is the best move, but against me he might well play a weaker, but safer, move, because he doesn't see the point of taking a chance when he expects to beat me anyway. It never occurred to me that he might do it because he is afraid I might be cheating.

If one player has met a few opponents who have managed to cheat while remaining at the board there must be many OTB cheats out there. It is inconceivable that there is no honest player who also knows how to do it. So let's have someone announce that they are going to cheat, win a game they should have had no chance in, without being detected, and then reveal how it is done. Until then I for one am not persuaded.

[Graham Borrowdale]

He played 1.g4 or 1...g5 in every game.

I guessed that might be the case, which kind of suggests he might be a bit bored.

[James Hooker]

In Titled Tuesday last night in round 10 the following "game" was played: https://www.chess.com/game/live/5926745 ... pr-It-g4-g Mamedov, who was white, had just beaten Hikaru and was leading the tournament on 8/9 with two rounds to go. This "win" helped Magnus to win the tournament with 9.5/11.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kheK31x ... ChessGames

Ive just had a look at this. if you go to 1hr 52min 30sec on the video.

You see Mamedovs clock going down to 2.49, then up to 2.59 after making his 1st move, then another couple of seconds before the resignation.
It looks like he had connection issues. But unsure why the resignation

or maybe meant to offer a draw and hit resign by accident?

[LawrenceCooper]

In Titled Tuesday last night in round 10 the following "game" was played: https://www.chess.com/game/live/5926745 ... pr-It-g4-g Mamedov, who was white, had just beaten Hikaru and was leading the tournament on 8/9 with two rounds to go. This "win" helped Magnus to win the tournament with 9.5/11.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kheK31x ... ChessGames

Ive just had a look at this. if you go to 1hr 52min 30sec on the video.

You see Mamedovs clock going down to 2.49, then up to 2.59 after making his 1st move, then another couple of seconds before the resignation.
It looks like he had connection issues. But unsure why the resignation

or maybe meant to offer a draw and hit resign by accident?

Thanks for that. It's interesting to see what happened even if we don't know why.

[Paolo Casaschi]

For what it's worth, organizers do have options, such as this one:

"If you are banned from an internet chess site for fair play reasons, we may require you to put up a good behaviour bond at the start of the tournament. If you are found cheating during the tournament, you will forfeit it."

Most online accounts are completely anonymous. Only very few players would share their identity, typically those trying to make money out of their activities on the chess site.
How would you enforce the above rule if the chess site does not know who you are?

[Roger de Coverly]

Most online accounts are completely anonymous. Only very few players would share their identity, typically those trying to make money out of their activities on the chess site.
How would you enforce the above rule if the chess site does not know who you are?

It could work with titled players because they get free membership and perhaps other perks for declaring their OTB titles.

Back in the days when ICC was market leader, titled players would often have two accounts. One was publicly declared, the other anonymous. the point being that they could experiment without the world and potential opponents eavesdropping.

[Paul Cooksey]

chess.com allows titled players 2 accounts too.

ICC used to charge a fee for untitled players to play, which meant there was a more significant consequence to being banned.

[JustinHorton]

More Dlugy

[LawrenceCooper]

More Dlugy

Not relevant to the cheating allegations but this took me by surprise:

"There is not even a reason for me to cheat in Titled Tuesday to win $500 or something. I charge more money for private chess lessons."

[Ian Thompson]

Not relevant to the cheating allegations but this took me by surprise:

"There is not even a reason for me to cheat in Titled Tuesday to win $500 or something. I charge more money for private chess lessons."

From $250 per hour.

[NickFaulks]

I got an email which included

"GM and Economics Professor Kenneth Rogoff Offers an Unorthodox Way to Settle the Carlsen-Niemann Dispute (Project Syndicate Blog)"

So I clicked on the embedded link and got to

https://www.project-syndicate.org/comme ... cesspaylog

It turns out that he will reveal his method of cutting through this Gordian knot, but only on payment of a fee. Wouldn't you think that the credit alone would be sufficient? Does he really need the money?

[Ian Thompson]

https://www.project-syndicate.org/comme ... cesspaylog

It turns out that he will reveal his method of cutting through this Gordian knot, but only on payment of a fee. Wouldn't you think that the credit alone would be sufficient? Does he really need the money?

I have no problem reading the whole article. He has two suggestions:

• Niemann to give detailed post-game interviews for a couple of games showing he worked everything out and didn't just get lucky or cheated.
• Niemann to play a match against Carlsen, part blitz and part 'regular', with as many anti-cheating measures as the organisers want. If Niemann wins, he's cleared of cheating; if Niemann loses badly he's assumed to have been cheating in the past.

You didn't miss much by not being able to read it.

[NickFaulks]

Niemann to give detailed post-game interviews for a couple of games showing he worked everything out and didn't just get lucky or cheated.

I know that I am a very long way below these guys, but I still think that demanding coherent analysis immediately after the end of a long and arduous game is unreasonable.

In postgame analysis the other week I was troubled that I couldn't even reconstruct my opponent's defence to my opening move. He pointed out that I had been playing the black pieces.

You didn't miss much by not being able to read it.

Disappointing from someone I regard as one of the great macroeconomists of my time.

[Angus French]

Disappointing from someone I regard as one of the great macroeconomists of my time.

I know of Rogoff as an advocate for austerity post the global financial crisis and famous for a spreadsheet error.

[JustinHorton]

More Dlugy

Dlugy doesn't seem to have impressed too many people with this and it's probably true that he hasn't done himself too many favours in a number of ways but he's quite right that Chesscom's conduct in declaring correspondence private and then having it published is indefensible. Not, you know, that any journalists seem to have asked him to defend it.

In re: the potential legal action Dlugy talks about, I'll believe it when I see it, either from him or from Niemann. Of course legal action for defamation at least is expensive and unreliable, and nobody can be blamed for giving it a miss, but you have to wonder how long people are going to feel able to say stuff like this without either the evidence to back it up or any effective pushback.