The fact this is in the sports forums is offensive
It’s a game at best.
It’s a game at best.
Chess discussions
- Thread starter Danny1982
- Start date
STFU.
It’s alongside cluedo, monopoly and mouse trap.
There is something interesting with Chess.com report, the ELO that they have for his "mass" cheating is in the late 2400s and according to centipawn loss his level has stagnated around 2500 since 2018.
Don't you have Arsenal fans to troll?
So, there are at least three lies from Niemann according to the report:
1. Never cheated for money except once while he was 12. The report found four Titled Tuesdays, latest in August 2020, and one Pro Chess League.
2. Never cheated on stream. 25 games were while streaming.
3. Except that one time for money, only cheated in some random games for higher ranking so he could play against the best. Cheated against Nepo and several 2600 players.
1. Never cheated for money except once while he was 12. The report found four Titled Tuesdays, latest in August 2020, and one Pro Chess League.
2. Never cheated on stream. 25 games were while streaming.
3. Except that one time for money, only cheated in some random games for higher ranking so he could play against the best. Cheated against Nepo and several 2600 players.
Check-mate
That interview he gave was such a misstep.
Downplaying his cheating while admitting that Chess.com have the best anti-cheating software, only for Chess.com to then say he had actually cheated upwards of 100 times. With the pressure only really having come on Chess.com to make a response because Hans made the fact that they had banned him again public knowledge.
When you've been accused of something, there's a lot to be said for saying as little as possible.
Downplaying his cheating while admitting that Chess.com have the best anti-cheating software, only for Chess.com to then say he had actually cheated upwards of 100 times. With the pressure only really having come on Chess.com to make a response because Hans made the fact that they had banned him again public knowledge.
When you've been accused of something, there's a lot to be said for saying as little as possible.
Only interesting thing left now is how he did it in OTB
Interestingly the misstep is due to something else. According to Chess.com the reason they decided to investigate further and publish the result predates the interview, it's because they decided to not invite Niemann to their 1m prize money tournament and Niemann didn't understood why. He seemingly misstepped before we knew that he misstepped.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I wouldn't be so sure about that yet. Chess.com themselves are open to talking to him and for some reason they themselves make a distinction between cheating online and otb - as an online chess company...
Maybe there's a way back for him with: "I'm coming fully clean by admitting only what others have already proven to the public, but this time I'm actually not lying, I swear."
Last edited:
Theres still a chance for redemption. It could be a long time away but time heals and he's got the fact he's still a teenager on his side.
He's supposed to be playing in the US ch now, isn't he? Would be funny in he won it, because everyone else refused to play him.
Can't possibly come back from this.
Permanent ban.
While damning on some instances, the chess.com report is a lot of hot air as well. Don't get me wrong, Hans definitely cheated more than what he admitted to and the repercussions should be bigger. It's also not wrong for chess.com to be involved in the overall debate on how to deal with online cheating and how these cases should be dealt with in regards to the FIDE framework of OTB chess as well as supporting each other in also detecting OTB cheaters.
But...
- their line of reasoning on the timing of Hans recent ban on chess.com as well as his exclusion from the GCC is really bad. If their anti-cheating detection system is so good, they should've detected his 2020-2022 cheating right away and banned him for good. Instead they only acted after Magnus withdrawal - without giving him a reason - and only proceeded to give him the reason after he complained in the Sinquefield Cup interview.
Like how was he able to cheat in multiple instances after his 2020 ban and they still invite him to the GCC? How did they only look into more games after Magnus withdrawal? As a previous cheater his games should've been in the focus all along. Looks like a plain "ignore things for commercial interest and then act only when things are about to blow into their face" approach.
- The majority of "findings" with regards to the OTB cheating are a lot of mixed statistical analysis that has been done all over the internet already in the past month (a lot of it . If they have no evidence why get involved at all if it's clearly not their jurisdiction?
- a lot of things a pure "he said that, he said this" speculation, why even include that? The following paragraph e.g. is particulary laughable, "Look at different reactions of people after beating Magnus"
- despite apparently being happy to share e-mail or other conversations (see the Dlugy case), they don't have share a single written admission of Hans about his cheating. Particulary weird given that they do that with the anomynous ~2700 player.
Overall a lot of the report reads like a student trying to fill pages on a paper. The online cheating stuff is damning and should've had consequences for Hans way way earlier. The rest smells like a big PR move (like 72 pages, please, it's about 20 pages with the rest being tables and screenshots) to put themselves on the forefront of anti-cheating and strengthen their position with regards to FIDE and they're just happy to make an example out of Hans.
But...
- their line of reasoning on the timing of Hans recent ban on chess.com as well as his exclusion from the GCC is really bad. If their anti-cheating detection system is so good, they should've detected his 2020-2022 cheating right away and banned him for good. Instead they only acted after Magnus withdrawal - without giving him a reason - and only proceeded to give him the reason after he complained in the Sinquefield Cup interview.
Like how was he able to cheat in multiple instances after his 2020 ban and they still invite him to the GCC? How did they only look into more games after Magnus withdrawal? As a previous cheater his games should've been in the focus all along. Looks like a plain "ignore things for commercial interest and then act only when things are about to blow into their face" approach.
- The majority of "findings" with regards to the OTB cheating are a lot of mixed statistical analysis that has been done all over the internet already in the past month (a lot of it . If they have no evidence why get involved at all if it's clearly not their jurisdiction?
- a lot of things a pure "he said that, he said this" speculation, why even include that? The following paragraph e.g. is particulary laughable, "Look at different reactions of people after beating Magnus"
- despite apparently being happy to share e-mail or other conversations (see the Dlugy case), they don't have share a single written admission of Hans about his cheating. Particulary weird given that they do that with the anomynous ~2700 player.
Overall a lot of the report reads like a student trying to fill pages on a paper. The online cheating stuff is damning and should've had consequences for Hans way way earlier. The rest smells like a big PR move (like 72 pages, please, it's about 20 pages with the rest being tables and screenshots) to put themselves on the forefront of anti-cheating and strengthen their position with regards to FIDE and they're just happy to make an example out of Hans.
Ban him. Cheating needs to be heavily punished.
They should tighten the security at OTB events. Full body scans and signal jammers at the very least.
They should tighten the security at OTB events. Full body scans and signal jammers at the very least.
Players at 24: it’s free real estate!
Got to make use of the advantages they can get.
skimming through the report the following passage is noteworthy (page 20 / conclusion):
- Apparently many other top players have also been cheating and got caught (Table2).
- After 2020 chess.com didn't find any game, where Hans Niemann cheated, which is genuinely surprising. So he stops cheating online but is supposed to start cheating OTB? Or did he just stop playing on chess.com and continued somewhere else?
- chess.com disregards some of the analysis that are floating around online, while these "reports" got lots of attention, even from some known top players (page 17: " We have concluded that the methodology and the underlying tools used in those analyses do not meet our standard."). So its pretty easy to get on the wrong track.
- at least at first glance figure E needs some explaining. That being said, Figure F is not plotted well so I am not sure how strange these rating strength plateaus really are.
- so he cheated a shitload till the end of 2020, including in price money events. It took chess.com years to react and he didn't get a perma ban?
- Apparently many other top players have also been cheating and got caught (Table2).
- After 2020 chess.com didn't find any game, where Hans Niemann cheated, which is genuinely surprising. So he stops cheating online but is supposed to start cheating OTB? Or did he just stop playing on chess.com and continued somewhere else?
- chess.com disregards some of the analysis that are floating around online, while these "reports" got lots of attention, even from some known top players (page 17: " We have concluded that the methodology and the underlying tools used in those analyses do not meet our standard."). So its pretty easy to get on the wrong track.
- at least at first glance figure E needs some explaining. That being said, Figure F is not plotted well so I am not sure how strange these rating strength plateaus really are.
If I'm not mistaken, he moved permanently to Lichess after his last ban and came back this year.
thanks. that makes sense. It would be really interesting to know if he continued cheating on lichess.
They checked Hans butt but noone else.
Hans has started the US championship strongly with a good win over Christopher Yoo.
I think his post match interview was a little counterproductive though. May have been better to forgo an interview altogether if he was going to come out like that, making a few cocky comments then refusing any questions. Not sure how it advances his case or makes him a guy you want at your tournament, even if he somehow comes through this. Quite an isolating move.
I think his post match interview was a little counterproductive though. May have been better to forgo an interview altogether if he was going to come out like that, making a few cocky comments then refusing any questions. Not sure how it advances his case or makes him a guy you want at your tournament, even if he somehow comes through this. Quite an isolating move.
He's playing victim when he's been shown to be a liar - not a wise move. If he keeps it up he won't be getting invites to tournaments especially if Magnus is there as he's said he won't play him again. Also it doesn't do much to dispel the accusation of him not being able to talk about his games with 2700 knowledge if he refuses to talk about the games at all. If he loses this game to Scott he's going to be 1W 1D 1L and all he's done to endear himself is to be a bellend to the casters. As Hikaru mentioned when he went over his game, it wasn't even a beautiful game there were a few blunders on both sides so even his cockiness is misplaced.
I think it's hilarious that Nakamura with his fake twitch persona gets to criticize people's behavior.
Having said that, Niemann was leaning into his own memes to deflect questions.
Having said that, Niemann was leaning into his own memes to deflect questions.
Niemann should stay quiet and actually let the chess speak for itself
Why should Don Hans give long interviews just so that armchair psychologists can make hour long body language analysis on youtube?
The chess speaks for itself and way more people are tuning in for his games than otherwise, an excellent outcome for organizers. If I'm holding a tournament I'm inviting him, irrespective of interviews.
The chess speaks for itself and way more people are tuning in for his games than otherwise, an excellent outcome for organizers. If I'm holding a tournament I'm inviting him, irrespective of interviews.
He can hardly give actual interviews, because that would confront him with the fact that chess.com outed him as a cheater in prize money games and a liar. Trolling is the only option he has left. Once his 15 minutes of fame are over I'm not sure being a cocky cheater will be such a big draw for organizers, especially not if his invite comes at the expense of Magnus withdrawing.
I meant talking about the games itself. Pretty sure he has lawyered up already with regards to the chess.com situation and obviously won't talk about that which is completely normal.
As for the Magnus issue, yeah that's a problem but there are a lot of chess tournaments without Magnus. It'll be a big issue obviously if he gets to 2750+ which I don't think he will.
He won't, because when he does all the super GMs scratch their heads and ask why he isn't able to talk about chess in a way that reflects his rating. This is a perfect excuse for him to avoid doing it.
#beadgate
Never heard an anus described as a gate before.
Buckle up.
Yeah, but that's nonsense. This argument came up after hour long games against Carlsen and Firouzja where he was clearly tired and in the latter case under extreme pressure after the Nr1 in the world effectively called him a cheater.
Multiple top GMs since then have said it's completely normal to be quite incoherent in game analysis after hours of concentration.
If he were a donkey just running stockfish lines that he doesn't understand he would've been busted long time ago.
He's clearly GM level and a capable player, just remains to be seen if really a legit 2700+ one.
Nobody is arguing that he's not a GM player or capable. The argument seems to be that his rating is actually around 2500 but he's inflated it via cheating and can no longer talk about chess at that level. Multiple GMs are constantly surprised by his move choices, calling them bizarre. His online play is pretty much undeniable, he's cheated extensively online it's just to what extent does that translate to OTB. If he's a 2700 rated player OTB where he can beat the world champion and end his 53 game win streak as black without even concentrating, then he would have no need to cheat online where spotting moves is infinitely easier, not to mention playing against lesser opposition. He is quite obviously not a legit 2700 player otherwise he'd be able to talk about Chess from that perspective and he can't, and he quite obviously just by observing his play is not the greatest rising Chess player of all time, which is what his stats state.
The Stockfish lines argument is a strawman I think, again nobody is stating that, that he's just using Stockfish all game. The 2700+ GMs are all in agreement that a GM using Stockfish one single time per game in a critical moment would be almost impossible to detect and would have a huge advantage, nobody is accusing him of what you just said.
Now all eyes are on him in the current championships with more intense anti cheat measures he's playing below what he was displaying previously, even his win contained blunders and in his current game he blundered an endgame draw into what's looking like a loss by giving Fabiano an obvious fork. He's playing poorly and unwilling to talk about his games, at the end of the day if it looks like a duck...
Last edited:
All that is irrelevant to the original point you made: That he would get exposed trying to analyse his games as not being good enough. And that is not the case and just an armchair observation because of his ramblings after the Firouzja game.
Didn't he say some odd stuff after the Magnus game, too? Like supposedly having coincidentally studied the precise line which the game followed based on some rapid game from years ago, which he mislabeled and which only got there by transposition? But even then his move times in the opening didn't match those you usually see from a well prepared player?
His explanation right after the game seemed a bit random but when he clarified a couple of days later it wasn't really outlandish. Magnus likes to play the Catalan, he studied variations of that and variants that can be reached through transpositions - and got lucky. Fabiano, the second best player of this generation, said that explanation made absolute sense to him.
That's what I'm saying. The guy quite likely cheated OTB in the last two years but irrespective of that, there's no benefit for him to do any interviews because every self-declared chess expert, statistician or armchair psychologist will jump onto the interview and over-analyse every word he says. I'd tell everyone to feck themselves in his position as well.
If "everyone" already believes that he's a cheater, who can't handle an interview, it's not going to change by dodging them. On the other hand he might change some minds if he actually showed sound analysis post match.