Carlsen resigns on move 2

[David Williams]

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.

If I was on a jury I would remember the case of Sally Clark, who was convicted of murder after the cot death of her two babies. There was no physical evidence, and the prosecution case relied pretty much entirely on the opinion of an expert witness. It took two appeals, and the eventual exposure of his nonsensical statistical justification for his opinion, before her conviction was overturned. She never recovered from the trauma and died of alcoholic poisoning a few years later. There is no way of knowing whether she did, or did not, murder her children.

[Paul Cooksey]

FIDE do not consider it necessary to prove cheating beyond reasonable doubt.

I think this is common for sports who need to prevent a threat to the sporting integrity.

[JustinHorton]

If I was on a jury I would remember the case of Sally Clark, who was convicted of murder after the cot death of her two babies. There was no physical evidence, and the prosecution case relied pretty much entirely on the opinion of an expert witness. It took two appeals, and the eventual exposure of his nonsensical statistical justification for his opinion, before her conviction was overturned. She never recovered from the trauma and died of alcoholic poisoning a few years later. There is no way of knowing whether she did, or did not, murder her children.

David, this doesn't strike you at all as a possibly inappropriate comparison to a case of alleged cheating at ches?

[Brian Egdell]

There is clearly no good comparison between alleged cheating at chess and alleged wrongdoing in other fields, but miscarriages of justice (or possible miscarriages) in criminal cases, of which horrifyingly many have turned up in recent decades, do in many cases illustrate the point that "expert opinion" can turn out to be absolutely wrong.

Often the expertise called on is only vaguely related to the specific requirements of the case. That, I think, is a huge pitfall when asking top players to judge whether their opponents, or players in other games, have been cheating.

To me it is plausible that top players might be particularly able to sense cheating at their own top levels, but it is far from an obvious tautology.

[Geoff Chandler]

....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.

Hi Keith,

These guys have been playing each other in closed shop tournaments for years. There was no cheating going on due to the strict measures and the video cameras on them all the time so I'm not too sure this lot have any experience facing OTB cheats.

IMO players like yourself and Danny are best placed to spot these OTB cheats as you both face many opponents in different locations where strict security and video cameras are not the norm. I put your opinion that cheating OTB is taking place well above the GM's you named. (basically, how would they know?)

[David Williams]

If I was on a jury I would remember the case of Sally Clark, who was convicted of murder after the cot death of her two babies. There was no physical evidence, and the prosecution case relied pretty much entirely on the opinion of an expert witness. It took two appeals, and the eventual exposure of his nonsensical statistical justification for his opinion, before her conviction was overturned. She never recovered from the trauma and died of alcoholic poisoning a few years later. There is no way of knowing whether she did, or did not, murder her children.

David, this doesn't strike you at all as a possibly inappropriate comparison to a case of alleged cheating at ches?

I agree it's possibly inappropriate, but I think it's relevant. In some ways it's actually a weaker analogy, in that there was no great problem in seeing how it was possible that the children were murdered, but no-one has produced any convincing explanation as to how Niemann could have cheated against Carlsen. It's not as if he was going to the toilet when it was his move. If he (and other people?) have found a way to cheat successfully at the highest level it's remarkable that all the guilty people know how it's done, but no-one else does. While I don't have the ability to second guess GMs on their ability to spot a cheat, it counts for very little if what they are alleging appears to be impossible.

If you are cheating by, say, being prompted on binary decisions (should I accept that sacrifice, should I exchange down to an ending) you only need occasional help. But if you are playing moves that a top GM would not consider and you don't really understand yourself, you surely have to be told what to do every single move until the reasoning becomes clear.

[Mick Norris]

I appreciate it's a long thread but I have linked to a video explaining how someone would do it without needing an accomplice, so your argument is wrong

I am not clear that Hans has cheated OTB but I do accept that lots of GMs appear to think so

[Kevin Thurlow]

I don't know if this has been posted already, but a legal person discusses HN's legal action.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNgNEiv6w0g

[NickFaulks]

FIDE do not consider it necessary to prove cheating beyond reasonable doubt.

Maybe, but I am pretty sure that CAS would overturn any penalty based on FIDE's current requirements.

[Matt Mackenzie]

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

Do we even know which games these are?

This is not a trivial question, and I would be surprised if his win again Carlsen was one of them.

[NickFaulks]

I have linked to a video explaining how someone would do it without needing an accomplice, so your argument is wrong

If I am thinking of the right one, it was by someone called John Fish and he came across as a total idiot.

[Roger de Coverly]

This is not a trivial question, and I would be surprised if his win again Carlsen was one of them.

It's a reasonable opinion that he ouplayed Carlsen in preparation, particularly in spotting the sideways transposition from a Nimzo-Indian to a Catalan and researching accordingly,

[David Williams]

I appreciate it's a long thread but I have linked to a video explaining how someone would do it without needing an accomplice, so your argument is wrong

If he could actually do what he suggests, even with rudimentary equipment, I might be convinced. He says that a4 could be communicated by buzzing 1,4. Fair enough. You would have to make it 1,2,1,4 or 4,1,1,4 to know whether it was a pawn or a queen move. h6 would be 8,6, and in the opening you might have 6,8,8,6, 7,8,8,6 or 8,7,8,6 to tell you which piece is moving there. It gets a tad more difficult when you are feeding your opponent's moves in by flexing your calf muscles nearly 30 times with pauses. And one tiny mistake means your engine is giving you moves for the wrong position, which might not be apparent for quite some time.

But let someone do it, and that at least shows it's possible. It doesn't prove it happened.

[Keith Arkell]

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.

I was referring to those who haven't spoken publicly at all about this business, eg Ding and Anand. Those who have spoken about it have been clever with their wording to avoid having to deal with the type of exhibitionistic antics Niemann is currently indulging in.

By the way, I think there is zero chance that any of the accused will 'settle', as some have suggested. To even go as far as a court case Niemann has to prove that Carlsen and others accused him of cheating while 'knowing it not to be the case'. That sets a very high bar.

[Keith Arkell]

....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.

Hi Keith,

These guys have been playing each other in closed shop tournaments for years. There was no cheating going on due to the strict measures and the video cameras on them all the time so I'm not too sure this lot have any experience facing OTB cheats.

IMO players like yourself and Danny are best placed to spot these OTB cheats as you both face many opponents in different locations where strict security and video cameras are not the norm. I put your opinion that cheating OTB is taking place well above the GM's you named. (basically, how would they know?)

Hi Geoff, you're correct in saying that we run into cheating more than the top guys do, but on those rare occasions in which they are exposed they are more skillful at detection than us because the stronger the player the more refined their judgement is.