There is two kinds of evidence that he may be referring to.
Circumstantial: Statistical analyzes of Niemann's game show abnormally high performance in some tournament (Above what Fisher has been able to accomplish in his best 20 victory streak). While this does not prove anything by itself, Magnus, from his interaction with Niemann doubt he understand chess at the required level.
Unlawfully obtained evidence: It could be a private conversation on chess.com website, or it could be a leaked SMS etc. This has been the case in one cheating scandal I know of. Where the cheater used the phone of the federation to transfert moves but they had to prove that the moves were transferred to the player (even if he happened to play all those moves). In this case, you know 100% he is cheating but you can not use this evidence in court.
Magnus is behaving in the way of the second case. If Hans Niemann doesn't come out, Magnus believes he has enough weight to destroy his carrier just by not playing a tournament where he will be playing. Slowly, tournament organiser will stop inviting.
Niemann is on a slippery slope, if he is not cheating, he will be able to keep producing extra high level games.
One thing is clear, Magnus is not accusing him to have cheated in the game he lost. Magnus must have had knowledge about the statistical analyses done by Chess.com on the guy prior to that, and the doubt had pushed Magnus to deliver a mediocre game.
ps. Magnus does not need help or to be helped. He is making an exemple out of Niemann to any young player tempted by cheating even online.
Cheaters tend to believe they have the skills of their assisted performance.
On September 27 2022 18:43 0x64 wrote: There is two kinds of evidence that he may be referring to.
Circumstantial: Statistical analyzes of Niemann's game show abnormally high performance in some tournament (Above what Fisher has been able to accomplish in his best 20 victory streak). While this does not prove anything by itself, Magnus, from his interaction with Niemann doubt he understand chess at the required level.
Unlawfully obtained evidence: It could be a private conversation on chess.com website, or it could be a leaked SMS etc. This has been the case in one cheating scandal I know of. Where the cheater used the phone of the federation to transfert moves but they had to prove that the moves were transferred to the player (even if he happened to play all those moves). In this case, you know 100% he is cheating but you can not use this evidence in court.
Magnus is behaving in the way of the second case. If Hans Niemann doesn't come out, Magnus believes he has enough weight to destroy his carrier just by not playing a tournament where he will be playing. Slowly, tournament organiser will stop inviting.
Niemann is on a slippery slope, if he is not cheating, he will be able to keep producing extra high level games.
One thing is clear, Magnus is not accusing him to have cheated in the game he lost. Magnus must have had knowledge about the statistical analyses done by Chess.com on the guy prior to that, and the doubt had pushed Magnus to deliver a mediocre game.
ps. Magnus does not need help or to be helped. He is making an exemple out of Niemann to any young player tempted by cheating even online.
Cheaters tend to believe they have the skills of their assisted performance.
He's doing nothing but using his considerable power and influence in professional chess to bully a youngster for beating him. What he's saying to young people getting involved in chess is "If you beat me on the board, i will destroy you off it, cos i'm rich and own half the tournaments" I have exactly the amount of evidence of this as Magnus as provided that he cheated.
On September 20 2022 03:31 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So what is going on? Is Magnus having a mental crack up that isn't new for Chess masters or something?
He needs to take a step back and realise what this looks like from the outside. He might be 100% convinced that there's cheating, but at least deal with it through the proper channels so it doesn't just look like a powerful guy bullying the new kid.
What he should do is keep playing Niemann and keep getting destroyed. That would be proof enough.
How can he convince someone if he doesnt play him showing how hes magically better.
On September 20 2022 03:31 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So what is going on? Is Magnus having a mental crack up that isn't new for Chess masters or something?
He needs to take a step back and realise what this looks like from the outside. He might be 100% convinced that there's cheating, but at least deal with it through the proper channels so it doesn't just look like a powerful guy bullying the new kid.
What he should do is keep playing Niemann and keep getting destroyed. That would be proof enough.
How can he convince someone if he doesnt play him showing how hes magically better.
I just wish he had done this better, without picking on someone just because he was embarrassed to lose.
If he has a stake in all these tournaments he should refuse to play in any of them until security measures are to his liking. That is fair, proportionate and reasonable.
On September 20 2022 03:31 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So what is going on? Is Magnus having a mental crack up that isn't new for Chess masters or something?
He needs to take a step back and realise what this looks like from the outside. He might be 100% convinced that there's cheating, but at least deal with it through the proper channels so it doesn't just look like a powerful guy bullying the new kid.
What he should do is keep playing Niemann and keep getting destroyed. That would be proof enough.
How can he convince someone if he doesnt play him showing how hes magically better.
I just wish he had done this better, without picking on someone just because he was embarrassed to lose.
If he has a stake in all these tournaments he should refuse to play in any of them until security measures are to his liking. That is fair, proportionate and reasonable.
First, I though the same, but we will see, asking all kind of stuff is the key to get labelled mad. It would be very simple for Hans to just say "sure, show us what you got, I am not going to sue you"...
Right now, Magnus is still letting the hacker do the right thing and come out clean. I have seen this so many times, currently, Hans is in denial of the consequences fueled by the belief he could have played at that level.
One thing I am sure is that Magnus is not going Fisher crazy.
Niemann should absolutely not allow Carlsen to speak freely without legal repercussions. Carlsen has done enough damage while skirting the law, there's no benefit to giving him free reign, it can only get worse. Niemann is innocent until proven guilty. Carlsen's behavior is unethical and must be condemned.
When Hans has played 10 games in his carrier with a 100% correlation with engine moves, not only does it proves he has cheated, but he has done it in a very stupid way.
Sorry to break it to you, but Hans Niemann is not the next genius of chess and the reason he has always been arrogant and condescending while analysing games after is because he had no idea why those moves were the best.
Now, if he knows chess better than every one else on the planet and refuse to show proof of it and talk down people, he deserves the doubt.
On September 28 2022 00:43 0x64 wrote: Ok let's cut the bullshit and talk numbers.
When Hans has played 10 games in his carrier with a 100% correlation with engine moves, not only does it proves he has cheated, but he has done it in a very stupid way.
Sorry to break it to you, but Hans Niemann is not the next genius of chess and the reason he has always been arrogant and condescending while analysing games after is because he had no idea why those moves were the best.
Now, if he knows chess better than every one else on the planet and refuse to show proof of it and talk down people, he deserves the doubt.
No, people are doubting him just because Magnus says so, and Magnus refuses to produce any evidence at all.
Which is why, when you're the World Champ and have loads of influence and power, you should do things by the book and not act like a spoilt child throwing your toys out of the pram because you lose a game, because people will leap to his defence and take his side no matter how much of a dick he's being.
On September 28 2022 00:43 0x64 wrote: Ok let's cut the bullshit and talk numbers.
When Hans has played 10 games in his carrier with a 100% correlation with engine moves, not only does it proves he has cheated, but he has done it in a very stupid way.
Sorry to break it to you, but Hans Niemann is not the next genius of chess and the reason he has always been arrogant and condescending while analysing games after is because he had no idea why those moves were the best.
Now, if he knows chess better than every one else on the planet and refuse to show proof of it and talk down people, he deserves the doubt.
Yes, lets. Those 10 games of allegedly 100% correlation actually have a range of 91-98% correlation, because, to reach the 100% during analysis, people used several engines in tandem. This means it's a form of selection bias. So that part is already misinformation. Furthermore, these 10 games occured over several years, and Niemann has played maybe 200 games or so in a very short timespan, so this is all fairly normal for an overperforming supertalent, which Niemann probably is.
His arrogance is irrelevant, many of the greatest chess players are arrogant. His analysis was not bad, that's something some people say, but it's not true at all. There are no chess players who's human analysis skills hold up against engine evaluation.
On September 28 2022 00:43 0x64 wrote: Ok let's cut the bullshit and talk numbers.
When Hans has played 10 games in his carrier with a 100% correlation with engine moves, not only does it proves he has cheated, but he has done it in a very stupid way.
Sorry to break it to you, but Hans Niemann is not the next genius of chess and the reason he has always been arrogant and condescending while analysing games after is because he had no idea why those moves were the best.
Now, if he knows chess better than every one else on the planet and refuse to show proof of it and talk down people, he deserves the doubt.
We don't need proof he has cheated. He has admitted that he has cheated. The question is whether he is continuing to cheat and weather he cheated at Sinquefield. Generally in court you're not even allowed to bring up prior convictions as evidence that someone has committed a crime they stand accused of.
The only evidence Magnus seems to have offered is that he thinks he is too good to have been beaten so confidently by Hans with black.
This isn't the first time there have been cheating allegations in a high profile chess tournament. In 2006 in the World Championship match Topalov's team implied that Kramnik was using a chess engine in the bathroom because Kramnik was making frequent visits to the bathroom during their match.
Anyway I was skimming the TL thread of the Topalov-Kramnik match and I found this post made 16 years ago:
On September 29 2006 17:54 IIICodeIIIIIII wrote: why not a plastic phone set to vibrate on a nerve, implanted up his ass? then people can morse code him moves while he's playing. no need for the toilet there.
Magnus and all the other super GMs played in a tournament with Hans 10 days before the drama started, and none of them were concerned about him cheating.
As soon as he beats Magnus, Magnus wants to bring up all this old shit about him cheating, even though when Magnus beat him less than two weeks earlier, he was perfectly happy to play him and not say anything.
For the record, Hans won the first game in Miami and then Magnus beat him 3 times. So Hans won a game, but Magnus said nothing about Hans cheating and everyone left the tournament happy.
Magnus loses and suddenly its a problem. Its pathetic.
On September 28 2022 00:43 0x64 wrote: Ok let's cut the bullshit and talk numbers.
When Hans has played 10 games in his carrier with a 100% correlation with engine moves, not only does it proves he has cheated, but he has done it in a very stupid way.
Sorry to break it to you, but Hans Niemann is not the next genius of chess and the reason he has always been arrogant and condescending while analysing games after is because he had no idea why those moves were the best.
Now, if he knows chess better than every one else on the planet and refuse to show proof of it and talk down people, he deserves the doubt.
Yes, lets. Those 10 games of allegedly 100% correlation actually have a range of 91-98% correlation, because, to reach the 100% during analysis, people used several engines in tandem. This means it's a form of selection bias. So that part is already misinformation. Furthermore, these 10 games occured over several years, and Niemann has played maybe 200 games or so in a very short timespan, so this is all fairly normal for an overperforming supertalent, which Niemann probably is.
His arrogance is irrelevant, many of the greatest chess players are arrogant. His analysis was not bad, that's something some people say, but it's not true at all. There are no chess players who's human analysis skills hold up against engine evaluation.
Then why does he has the best stats in the world? I agree proof is required before throwing him out. We will see what comes out.
Did Nepo discovered and discuss something with Magnus within the last 10 days. As stated, they were not paranoid about him earlier...
To be honest, I don't think he cheated against Magnus. I'm convinced he has cheated live.
On September 28 2022 00:43 0x64 wrote: Ok let's cut the bullshit and talk numbers.
When Hans has played 10 games in his carrier with a 100% correlation with engine moves, not only does it proves he has cheated, but he has done it in a very stupid way.
Sorry to break it to you, but Hans Niemann is not the next genius of chess and the reason he has always been arrogant and condescending while analysing games after is because he had no idea why those moves were the best.
Now, if he knows chess better than every one else on the planet and refuse to show proof of it and talk down people, he deserves the doubt.
Yes, lets. Those 10 games of allegedly 100% correlation actually have a range of 91-98% correlation, because, to reach the 100% during analysis, people used several engines in tandem. This means it's a form of selection bias. So that part is already misinformation. Furthermore, these 10 games occured over several years, and Niemann has played maybe 200 games or so in a very short timespan, so this is all fairly normal for an overperforming supertalent, which Niemann probably is.
His arrogance is irrelevant, many of the greatest chess players are arrogant. His analysis was not bad, that's something some people say, but it's not true at all. There are no chess players who's human analysis skills hold up against engine evaluation.
This is a bit of a nonsense argument that i have seen pop up more often. The argument is that they brute forced a 100% correlation by adding as many engines as needed. But this is nonsense i dont see how. No matter how many (good) engines you add,they will still rate all the moves more or less equally so the impact of adding more and more engines is minimal. There wont be an engine that suddenly qualifies a mediocre move as a top move,thereby helping to bruteforce a 100% correlation.
Yoskas analyzis does seem to contain a few small mistakes i wont deny that (though i dont think they challenge the overall conclusion),but the brute force 100% correlation argument is nonsense.
On September 28 2022 00:43 0x64 wrote: Ok let's cut the bullshit and talk numbers.
When Hans has played 10 games in his carrier with a 100% correlation with engine moves, not only does it proves he has cheated, but he has done it in a very stupid way.
Sorry to break it to you, but Hans Niemann is not the next genius of chess and the reason he has always been arrogant and condescending while analysing games after is because he had no idea why those moves were the best.
Now, if he knows chess better than every one else on the planet and refuse to show proof of it and talk down people, he deserves the doubt.
Yes, lets. Those 10 games of allegedly 100% correlation actually have a range of 91-98% correlation, because, to reach the 100% during analysis, people used several engines in tandem. This means it's a form of selection bias. So that part is already misinformation. Furthermore, these 10 games occured over several years, and Niemann has played maybe 200 games or so in a very short timespan, so this is all fairly normal for an overperforming supertalent, which Niemann probably is.
His arrogance is irrelevant, many of the greatest chess players are arrogant. His analysis was not bad, that's something some people say, but it's not true at all. There are no chess players who's human analysis skills hold up against engine evaluation.
Then why does he has the best stats in the world? I agree proof is required before throwing him out. We will see what comes out.
Did Nepo discovered and discuss something with Magnus within the last 10 days. As stated, they were not paranoid about him earlier...
To be honest, I don't think he cheated against Magnus. I'm convinced he has cheated live.
He doesn't. Niemann's stats are completely normal at this level. People are spreading rumors and misinformation.
On September 28 2022 00:43 0x64 wrote: Ok let's cut the bullshit and talk numbers.
When Hans has played 10 games in his carrier with a 100% correlation with engine moves, not only does it proves he has cheated, but he has done it in a very stupid way.
Sorry to break it to you, but Hans Niemann is not the next genius of chess and the reason he has always been arrogant and condescending while analysing games after is because he had no idea why those moves were the best.
Now, if he knows chess better than every one else on the planet and refuse to show proof of it and talk down people, he deserves the doubt.
Yes, lets. Those 10 games of allegedly 100% correlation actually have a range of 91-98% correlation, because, to reach the 100% during analysis, people used several engines in tandem. This means it's a form of selection bias. So that part is already misinformation. Furthermore, these 10 games occured over several years, and Niemann has played maybe 200 games or so in a very short timespan, so this is all fairly normal for an overperforming supertalent, which Niemann probably is.
His arrogance is irrelevant, many of the greatest chess players are arrogant. His analysis was not bad, that's something some people say, but it's not true at all. There are no chess players who's human analysis skills hold up against engine evaluation.
This is a bit of a nonsense argument that i have seen pop up more often. The argument is that they brute forced a 100% correlation by adding as many engines as needed. But this is nonsense i dont see how. No matter how many (good) engines you add,they will still rate all the moves more or less equally so the impact of adding more and more engines is minimal. There wont be an engine that suddenly qualifies a mediocre move as a top move,thereby helping to bruteforce a 100% correlation.
Yoskas analyzis does seem to contain a few small mistakes i wont deny that (though i dont think they challenge the overall conclusion),but the brute force 100% correlation argument is nonsense.
Niemann has played against opponents that are much lower rated than those of Carlsen. If he's overperforming because of his skill, then it's completely expected that he plays more games with higher engine correlation, because his opponents play moves that are more easily refuted by a highly skilled human player. Imagine if Carlsen started beating up 2200 to 2500 ELO rated players, he'd completely destroy them with a much greater than usual accuracy, too.
The ELO rating of Niemann's opponents during those ten selected games was 2558, 2430, 2283, 2427, 2454, 2204, 2376, 2398, 2466 and 2542. That ranges from 2204 to 2558 and gives an average of ~2414. In those same games Niemann was rated 2478, 2459, 2439, 2465, 2526, 2567, 2571, 2606, 2609 and 2637. That ranges from 2439 to 2637 and gives an average of ~2536. The distance between the total averages is +122. The distance in each individual game is -80, +29, +156, +38, +72, +363, +195, +208, +143 and +95. This fact really sticks out, it gives Niemann a huge advantage in six of those games, and a small advantage in another three. He only had a rating disadvantage once, i.e. 10% of the time over all the selected games. So the first thing we can see is that Niemann had a very big rating advantage over most of his opponents during these ten games, which means we're comparing apples (Niemann's rise to the top) to oranges (Carlsen's defending of the throne). If we only look at Carlsen's games where his opponents are much lower rated, we should also see him having a very high accuracy, and that's an analysis that I haven't seen anyone do yet for Carlsen or any other top rated player.
So far I've analyzed three of the ten alleged 100% accuracy games using Stockfish 15 NNUE.
In the first game in the list against Matthieu Cornette, Niemann played only natural moves the entire game. He outplayed his opponent with moves that every GM would consider normal.
In the second game in the list against Christopher Woojin Yoo, Niemann plays 6... d6, which costs ~0.8 evaluation points, but it leads to a commonly known position. 8... Bd7 costs ~0.4. 10... h6 costs ~0.4 (it's also one of the weirdest moves to make. Niemann can eliminate the knight and quickly castle kingside. Instead he blocks the Bg5 idea, which is not as strong compared to the bigger threat of white lining up his rook against the unprotected king. So Niemann played a move that no engine would recommend, and humans would only recommend it if they have an attacking plan, which was probably considered already while playing d6). His opponent then gives away his advantage with Qc3 and also plays f3, which allows Niemann to go for a strong attacking idea that many GMs should be aware of, busting open the center and creating a mating attack. Niemann probably set up the idea of castling queenside already when he played 10... h6, leaving him with attacking options down the line. This would also explain the nature of the move.
This is only one of the many examples where Niemann outplayed his opponent, and the engine correlation was certainly not 100%. It's strictly a lie to claim that it was, because all engines would recommend capturing the knight on f5 on move 10 and quickly castling kingside. Maybe Niemann thought there was a Qc6+ idea in that line that could give him trouble, or maybe he wanted to create an attack himself. All engines would also recommend against 6... d6, this opening idea is entirely human and leads to double-edged, imbalanced positions. It's fairly obvious that Niemann had attacking plans the whole game.
In the third game in the list against Miguel Angel Soto, Niemann goes for another imbalanced position, again castling queenside (might be thematic for him?). Both he and his opponent have clearly done their homework and are playing only the top engine moves until move 18 or 19. Wow, look at how Soto is playing a perfect game for so many moves, he must be a cheater. Or maybe they both know their theory, seems like an alternative explanation, right? Finally Soto makes a small inaccuracy with 19. h3, but it's the second best move so he's probably still cheating. Niemann supports the knight with the very common idea of 19... h5. Every GM knows this idea, in fact most of my opponents would also play this move in 3 minute blitz. Soto has to continue with 20. f3, but he blunders the whole game instantly with 20. Na3 instead. Niemann pounces with the tactical shot of f3. Everyone at 1700+ would see this move. Soto takes the knight on g4, Niemann recaptures, and the rest of the game is easy going because the white king can't escape. Soto resigns soon after. This game is another example of Niemann outplaying his opponent with obvious moves, there's nothing suspicious about it.
EPT
