Carlsen resigns on move 2

[Jon Tait]

An article looking into Han’s cycling claims; https://cyclingtips.com/2022/10/chess-o ... he-really/

yeah, probably best to leave out the teenage braggadocio when it's going to be subjected to rigorous scrutiny

[Keith Arkell]

Professionals/GMs are typically extremely good at sensing when they are being cheated but awful at knowing how it might be done.

Publishing games where GMs thought their opponents played exceptionally well would be a possibility. I think you could name names provided the comments made no allegations and just complimented the opposition on the accuracy of their play. You would get a few false positives though, games where the opposition did play well without assistance or where the assistance was pre game.

Did you consider that strange game in one of the online Championships where you entered a Rook and Pawn ending with fewer pawns and won?

Keith did that at South Wales as well.

I believe that my opponent in the game Roger refers too got thrown out soon after, for cheating, whereas my opponent in the game Jack refers to is an honest player, played a good game, but played worse than me in the R+P.

To Roger's suggestion ( Publishing games where GMs thought their opponents played exceptionally well would be a possibility) I would say cheating detection is a very subtle thing, and not necessarily about pointing the finger at exceptionally well played games. A game which a human defines as well played would most likely have been played by a strong human or a human honestly playing the game of their life. Engine chess is very different. It doesn't look like good chess at first, but contains deep tactics which always work. It's hard to put into words but if you are a strong player and you have a lot of experience looking at chess with engines you recognise it.

Yesterday I listened to an interview with MVL about this cheating scandal. I knew immediately that he was referring to this same feeling you get when one of the players is playing engine moves. He didn't outrightly accuse Hans of otb cheating. It is dangerous to, of course, but he referred to some of his suspicious otb games. I think most of the top players have the same feeling about this case. You can listen to MVL on Premier Chess Podcast Episode 230 with National Master Evan Rabin.

[Keith Arkell]

Copy of previous post deleted

[Simon Brown]

On a lighter note, a question on Eggheads tonight was “In which field are Ding Liren and Ian Nepo….. leading personalities?” The challenging team after due consideration answered “Artificial Intelligence” to which the host said “the correct answer is chess, so I suppose you’re not far out”.

[Roger de Coverly]

[ Engine chess is very different. It doesn't look like good chess at first, but contains deep tactics which always work. It's hard to put into words but if you are a strong player and you have a lot of experience looking at chess with engines you recognise it.

When it's in the early middle game at least, what looks like engine analysis could well be engine analysis. That doesn't mean it took place during the game rather than before the game. I doubt that the theoretical knowledge of the chess.com cheat finders is that deep.

[Matt Bridgeman]

I figured the ‘spyware’ style miniature earpiece (that you need a magnet to extract) weren’t going to be very detectable and so it appears; https://en.chessbase.com/post/are-the-s ... neffective

[Roger de Coverly]

I figured the ‘spyware’ style miniature earpiece (that you need a magnet to extract) weren’t going to be very detectable and so it appears;

From the article

This equipment allows a second person to send signals to the Smartwatch from outside, which are then relayed to the tiny earpiece.

Thus it needs a collaborator with access to the game in progress and a means of obtaining assessments and move suggestions.

I would think Chess 960 more vulnerable to temptation to use engine assistance than conventional chess. That's because the patterns, early on at least, are unfamiliar so less susceptable to historic knowledge, understanding and pre game research.

[Brian Egdell]

I figured the ‘spyware’ style miniature earpiece (that you need a magnet to extract) weren’t going to be very detectable and so it appears; https://en.chessbase.com/post/are-the-s ... neffective

The original Norwegian language article linked to in that chessbase.com summary suggests (via a quote from the FIDE vice-president Jøran Aulin-Jansson) that the reporter was stopped at an initial check when the most obvious items were detected. The more subtle items such as the ear implant would have shown up during further scanning by other equipment if she had got that far.

[Keith Arkell]

Post duplicated, for some reason!

[Matt Bridgeman]

I figured the ‘spyware’ style miniature earpiece (that you need a magnet to extract) weren’t going to be very detectable and so it appears; https://en.chessbase.com/post/are-the-s ... neffective

The original Norwegian language article linked to in that chessbase.com summary suggests (via a quote from the FIDE vice-president Jøran Aulin-Jansson) that the reporter was stopped at an initial check when the most obvious items were detected. The more subtle items such as the ear implant would have shown up during further scanning by other equipment if she had got that far.

I guess the smart-smart cheater might just use the spyware for one key game in a tournament where they might be the underdog or really want the point, and obviously not be wearing anything that would show up in the average entrance scan. For people who think Hans has cheated on more than one occasion during his quick rise, isn’t that what they more or less imply he did?

Quite a bit on Chessbase news this week. Icelandic Grandmaster Hjörvar Gretarsson weighed in a little;

"I had the same feeling as Carlsen. I thought he was unfocused and opened the position. When it got complicated, he also played fast. At first I thought he was extremely talented. But I thought of cheating when I looked at the game afterwards. But I still assumed he hadn't cheated because I had no proof. For a lawyer, it's not fair to accuse someone of cheating without evidence."

https://en.chessbase.com/post/carlsen-a ... s-on-chess

[Keith Arkell]

Quite a bit on Chessbase news this week. Icelandic Grandmaster Hjörvar Gretarsson weighed in a little;

"I had the same feeling as Carlsen. I thought he was unfocused and opened the position. When it got complicated, he also played fast. At first I thought he was extremely talented. But I thought of cheating when I looked at the game afterwards. But I still assumed he hadn't cheated because I had no proof. For a lawyer, it's not fair to accuse someone of cheating without evidence."

https://en.chessbase.com/post/carlsen-a ... s-on-chess

I guess the other relevant bit in the article is GM Wesley So's apt quote:

''Carlsen saw at the Sinquefield Cup that something was wrong and withdrew from the tournament. I have a lot of respect for that."

Obviously I'm no lawyer, but I'd be amazed if Niemann's ridiculous attempt at deflection got him anywhere.

[Gerard Killoran]

I guess the other relevant bit in the article is GM Wesley So's apt quote:

''Carlsen saw at the Sinquefield Cup that something was wrong and withdrew from the tournament. I have a lot of respect for that."

Obviously I'm no lawyer, but I'd be amazed if Niemann's ridiculous attempt at deflection got him anywhere.

So what, apart from Niemann's demeanour at the board which none of the spectators found unusual, did Carlsen see that was wrong? Perhaps Wesley So could enlighten us.

It doesn't need a lawyer to see that these are just evidence-free accusations.

[Keith Arkell]

Wesley respects Carlsen's judgement.

The top players have probably all had similar experiences themselves, at one time or another in their careers. If you want to get to the truth of this matter then the most relevant people to listen to are the strongest players in the world. They are fine-tuned to recognise when something isn't right, and by now all will have examined Niemann's suspicious games.

For legal reasons all are careful with their wording though, or don't say anything at all.

THis kind of case is obviously unusual from a legal perspective because the kinds of proof neutrals or those siding with Hans are calling for are obviously hard to come by, unless we get lucky, like with Rausis. So therefore the next best thing is to respect what those with the best detective skills in these matters have to say - and that is the likes of Wesley So, Hikaru Nakamura, Ian Nepomniachtchi, Maxime Vachier-Lagrave and Fabiano Caruana.

[JustinHorton]

For legal reasons all are careful with their wording though, or don't say anything at all.

If they're not saying anything at all then their opinions can't really be taken into account, and I don't just mean legally.

[NickFaulks]

and by now all will have examined Niemann's suspicious games.

Do we even know which games these are?