Chess Cheating Poll
-
- Posts: 10384
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
- Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
I would like to know why anyone thinks the answer is yes, beyond any reasonable doubt, given there's no firm evidence
Still, along the lines Joey mentions, the best thing is not to end up in court as you may get wrongly convicted
Still, along the lines Joey mentions, the best thing is not to end up in court as you may get wrongly convicted
Any postings on here represent my personal views
-
- Posts: 1526
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
I suppose it might be a confession, but that seems very unlikely!Mick Norris wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 9:21 amI would like to know why anyone thinks the answer is yes, beyond any reasonable doubt, given there's no firm evidence
-
- Posts: 3562
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
- Location: Awbridge, Hampshire
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
I was thinking of discussing the game with another person while it is still in progress, for example. No computers directly involved; no plans to do it in advance. If someone approached a player and started discussing their game what proportion of players would stop the discussion immediately and what proportion would take advantage of the opportunity?Matt Mackenzie wrote: ↑Fri Oct 07, 2022 4:14 pmI would have thought the fact that, even on pessimistic assumptions for the latter, many more people cheat online than OTB somewhat contradicts this - not only is online cheating easier, it is widely regarded (approve of this mindset or not) as "less serious".Ian Thompson wrote: ↑Fri Oct 07, 2022 3:13 pmI went for "cannot decide" on the grounds that someone who is prepared to cheat online may well cheat OTB if the opportunity arose, even if they had no plans to do so before the game began.
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
I am not sure this is true, though it may depend on whether we mean "by the people who do it" or "by the people who don't".Matt Mackenzie wrote: ↑Fri Oct 07, 2022 4:14 pmI would have thought the fact that, even on pessimistic assumptions for the latter, many more people cheat online than OTB somewhat contradicts this - not only is online cheating easier, it is widely regarded (approve of this mindset or not) as "less serious".
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 1188
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:46 am
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
Agree.Joey Stewart wrote: ↑Fri Oct 07, 2022 2:23 pmAnyone who chose 'no, beyond any reasonable doubt' I would like to personally select you as my jurors if I am ever convicted of a crime.
That option should not even be there, you can not prove a negative and you should not be required to do so.
As far as I can tell, not even Carlsen has ever proven that he is not cheating beyond any reasonable doubt. In fact, two elements raise suspicion about Carlsen: 1) he plays chess very well 2) he thinks a lot of people are cheating
Anyone asking Niemann to prove he is not cheating should ask Carlsen first.
-
- Posts: 1921
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
Personally, no doubt about it, I would stop the discussion immediately. So, I hope, would most pIayers - even if the discussion was harmless, eg. revolved around something which occurred or might have occurred much earlier in the game.Ian Thompson wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 10:26 am
I was thinking of discussing the game with another person while it is still in progress, for example. No computers directly involved; no plans to do it in advance. If someone approached a player and started discussing their game what proportion of players would stop the discussion immediately and what proportion would take advantage of the opportunity?
-
- Posts: 3053
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
Carlsen - and all of that generation - have the great advantage of being known to play at their level before it was really practically realistic to cheat OTB & no one cared about online.Paolo Casaschi wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 11:36 amAgree.Joey Stewart wrote: ↑Fri Oct 07, 2022 2:23 pmAnyone who chose 'no, beyond any reasonable doubt' I would like to personally select you as my jurors if I am ever convicted of a crime.
That option should not even be there, you can not prove a negative and you should not be required to do so.
As far as I can tell, not even Carlsen has ever proven that he is not cheating beyond any reasonable doubt. In fact, two elements raise suspicion about Carlsen: 1) he plays chess very well 2) he thinks a lot of people are cheating
Anyone asking Niemann to prove he is not cheating should ask Carlsen first.
Unfair but any youngsters coming up now & into the future are going to be much more prone to suspicion. It'll probably be even worse for any future later life improvers on the line of Hawkins etc.
-
- Posts: 1921
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
Are you sure about that? Allwermann (1998) is but one of severaI pIayers suspected of OTB cheating in the past.MartinCarpenter wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 12:25 pm
Carlsen - and all of that generation - have the great advantage of being known to play at their level before it was really practically realistic to cheat OTB & no one cared about online.
-
- Posts: 8475
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
You wouldn't have forty years ago, though. Conversations during the round such as "I bet you wish you had castled kingside now", "no, I think my attack gets in quicker", were entirely routine and nobody thought anything of it, right up to top GM level. Times change.Roger Lancaster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 11:47 amPersonally, no doubt about it, I would stop the discussion immediately. So, I hope, would most pIayers - even if the discussion was harmless, eg. revolved around something which occurred or might have occurred much earlier in the game.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 3053
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
Hard to be sure, sure but if you're trying to do it at an elite level? You need things small.Roger Lancaster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 12:36 pmAre you sure about that? Allwermann (1998) is but one of severaI pIayers suspected of OTB cheating in the past.MartinCarpenter wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 12:25 pm
Carlsen - and all of that generation - have the great advantage of being known to play at their level before it was really practically realistic to cheat OTB & no one cared about online.
Track the march of technology. When did smartphone cpu's hit >super GM level? Not sure when but relatively recent I guess. That's the first semi convenient time, but frankly you'd be caught pretty fast in any size/level of tournament.
So a few years on from there. Also tiny camera technology etc etc.
-
- Posts: 21322
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
Also "von Neumann" (1993)Roger Lancaster wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 12:36 pmAre you sure about that? Allwermann (1998) is but one of severaI pIayers suspected of OTB cheating in the past.
https://en.chessbase.com/post/a-history ... g-in-che-2
-
- Posts: 1188
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:46 am
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
Not so sure.MartinCarpenter wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 12:25 pmCarlsen - and all of that generation - have the great advantage of being known to play at their level before it was really practically realistic to cheat OTB & no one cared about online.
Kasparov lost to Deep Blue in the 90s.
Carlsen was 11 when the world champion Kramnik could not defeat a commercial software in a match. Shortly afterwards man vs machine matches did not make any sense anymore.
Last edited by Paolo Casaschi on Sat Oct 08, 2022 1:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Posts: 8475
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
Bit late now, but perhaps the wording of the question is not ideal.
"Do you think it is likely Hans cheated OTB?".
No, I do not think it is at all likely, and I felt that the fifth option came closest to representing that opinion.
Would I concede that there is, say, a 0.01% chance that he is cheating in his OTB games? Yes, of course I would, and I would say the same about any top player. However, ticking the fourth option suggests to me something more like 20% than 0.01%, so I did not feel able to tick it.
My preferred question would be "if we could know tomorrow, with certainly, whether Hans cheated in the Sinquefield Cup, at what odds would you back yes or no? With some ranges. The problem is that most people are not trained to think in those terms.
"Do you think it is likely Hans cheated OTB?".
No, I do not think it is at all likely, and I felt that the fifth option came closest to representing that opinion.
Would I concede that there is, say, a 0.01% chance that he is cheating in his OTB games? Yes, of course I would, and I would say the same about any top player. However, ticking the fourth option suggests to me something more like 20% than 0.01%, so I did not feel able to tick it.
My preferred question would be "if we could know tomorrow, with certainly, whether Hans cheated in the Sinquefield Cup, at what odds would you back yes or no? With some ranges. The problem is that most people are not trained to think in those terms.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 1295
- Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
I suspect the reaction of spectators watching a game might sometimes be wrongly construed as a hint to a participant, which suggests it might occasionally be a deliberate act. At the end of a very tense match, one of my opponents made a horrible blunder. I saw the win but in my excitement glanced up at a spectator before moving. Pure relief that the title challenge hadn't been derailed, but my action and any reaction could have been misunderstood.
-
- Posts: 8475
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: Chess Cheating Poll
Spectators can be a real problem, nearly always unintentionally on anyone's part. Had this one, possibly the club's strongest player, shown on his face an involuntary look of horror, might you have looked back at the board and realised that your opponent's blunder was in fact a devilish trap? These things happen.J T Melsom wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 1:20 pmI suspect the reaction of spectators watching a game might sometimes be wrongly construed as a hint to a participant, which suggests it might occasionally be a deliberate act. At the end of a very tense match, one of my opponents made a horrible blunder. I saw the win but in my excitement glanced up at a spectator before moving. Pure relief that the title challenge hadn't been derailed, but my action and any reaction could have been misunderstood.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.