English Chess Forum

I'm interested in what other chess fans think is the likelihood Hans cheated OTB.

He is of course presumed innocent until FIDE complete their enquiry.

Has his enormous bouffant been scanned for playing aides?

There is certainly room in there for all sorts of things.

Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 07, 2022 11:58 am

I'm interested in what other chess fans think is the likelihood Hans cheated OTB.

He is of course presumed innocent until FIDE complete their enquiry.

I'd like to think he's presumed innocent until proved guilty, whether the FIDE enquiry is capable of this is a different question

One option open to that enquiry would be to decide that fibbing about cheating at chess brings chess into disrepute

Anyone 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.

"Anyone 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."

They are not much use if they still find you guilty?

Joey Stewart wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 07, 2022 2:23 pm

Anyone 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.

If they can prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that something didn't happen, then they should be employed as cheat detectors. Anyone who can prove that negative should find it very easy to prove the positive when that happens.

I 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.

Ian Thompson wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 07, 2022 3:13 pm

I 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.

I 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".

Joey Stewart wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 07, 2022 2:23 pm

Anyone 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.

Would you say the same if the question had been "Do you think it likely that Magnus cheated OTB?"

Hi Matt,

IMO an online cheat is a petty thief nicking a sweet from the corner shop. The shop bans them. The end.
An OTB Cheat. Grand Larceny. You pay an entrance fee, travel costs, accommodation... They shake your hand, wish you 'Good Luck', sit opposite you for 2-3 hours and slowly and deliberately steal from you.
That is how far apart I place them. Others can have a different opinion, fair enough.
Regarding playing online for cash. I'll never play in such an event but as I mentioned elsewhere. What did they really think was going to happen when they leave money laying about on a website that bans 292,000 players a year. They deserve to get robbed.

Edit: voted for No, on balance of probability.

NickFaulks wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 07, 2022 4:17 pm

Joey Stewart wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 07, 2022 2:23 pm

Anyone 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.

Would you say the same if the question had been "Do you think it likely that Magnus cheated OTB?"

I wouldn't say you can prove any top level GM to have not cheated beyond reasonable doubt as every single one of them (carlsen included) will at least begin the game with perfect engine analysis of the position so the fact that engine play occurs with a 100% certainty means you can never be sure if they did it pre game and brought it in their head or did it during, safe in the knowledge that they would be expected to know it and it would not be suspicious at this stage.

This affair was discussed on BBC4's The News Quiz hosted by Andy Zaltzman with hilarious consequences.

Joey Stewart wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 07, 2022 5:54 pm

NickFaulks wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 07, 2022 4:17 pm

Joey Stewart wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 07, 2022 2:23 pm

Anyone 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.

Would you say the same if the question had been "Do you think it likely that Magnus cheated OTB?"

I wouldn't say you can prove any top level GM to have not cheated beyond reasonable doubt as every single one of them (carlsen included) will at least begin the game with perfect engine analysis of the position so the fact that engine play occurs with a 100% certainty means you can never be sure if they did it pre game and brought it in their head or did it during, safe in the knowledge that they would be expected to know it and it would not be suspicious at this stage.

That is quite a sentence. In one word, was it yes?

John Upham wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 07, 2022 8:18 pm

with hilarious consequences.

I shall take your word for that.

Joey Stewart wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 07, 2022 2:23 pm

Anyone 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.

Anyone who says almost anything as being beyond any reasonable doubt generally doesn't have much of an imagination!
(Or a very strict definition of reasonable )