The Wall Street Journal had an article on the controversy at the Sinquefield Cup yesterday. No discussion of it here?
I’m also surprised at the lack of interest here. What I find interesting is that Niemann admits cheating in several online events, but swears that he has never done so over the board. I haven’t seen any convincing evidence that he cheated in this event, though. In the absence of such evidence, I prefer to presume innocence. I think Carlsen is just a sore loser.
I played Niemann once (in the G/60 Weekend Swiss at the 2013 US Open). He was around 10 years old at the time, but already strong enough to beat me. We both made mistakes (among other things, he hung a piece in the middlegame, and I returned the favor by failing to notice the hung piece). He ultimately outplayed me in an endgame where we both had pawns and he had a Knight. It was a very typical case of a Class B player outplaying a Class C player in a mutually flawed game. No evidence at all of any foul play.
i’m leaning, dennis’s way - Mr Carlsen just miffed. didn’t even seem like that spectacular of a game to me, from Mr Niemann’s play. Carlsen played some weak-arsed %$#&.
awaiting a verdict though. Niemann’s after-game interviews are sorta weird though, to say the least…
…scot…
Scot L Henderson
Carlsen upped the ante at the Generation Cup when he resigned vs. Niemann after playing exactly one move. Meanwhile Prof. Ken Regan has examined Niemann’s play and concluded that there is no evidence of cheating that his analysis can detect. Where does Carlsen go from here?
I’m reminded of something GM Larry Evans told me years ago when I visited him in Reno and we were chatting about Fischer and other world-class players: Playing world-class chess makes you go crazy.
1 Like
After 3.5/4 today Carlsen is again in the lead in the Generation Cup, and has clinched a spot in the knock-out rounds. His most likely Quarter-Final opponent as of now would be…Niemann. Carlsen could get away with refusing to play a real game against Niemann in the prelims without harming his tournament chances too much, but if he refuses to play Niemann in a knock-out round he is out of the tournament. Would he really go that far? Inquiring minds want to know.
I would love to see fate “put the question” to Magnus. However, if that happens it means that Niemann made it to the quarterfinals by virtue of the 3 points Carlson gave him earlier, which of course means that that forfeit effectively cheated someone else out of the spot.
I do wish there was more discussion of what to do about Carlson’s inexcusable conduct and less on wild unsupported allegations. Whatever case Carlson thinks he has, he is going about things in ways that impact other people, and that should not be permitted.
I know the situation in question isn’t a US Chess issue (although the tournament was US Chess rated) but perhaps it’s time to look at updating the US Chess rules that are at least to some degree cheating related (electronic devices, etc.).
I have yet to see anything that indicates there was cheating in the Sinquefield Cup, and I’m not sure I’ve seen anything that suggests there was cheating in that other, online, event.
1 Like
Regardless of if there was cheating or not in this case, it still may be a good idea to look into updating the US Chess rules that pertain at least somewhat to cheating.
Also, this video is very interesting: youtube.com/watch?v=OK9ZkoSQNFs
I’ve always been a believer in the “If it isn’t broke, don’t fix it” principle.
You’re going to have to convince people that that the current rules for cheaters don’t work, and I’m not sure you can do that. A major part of the problem is that cheating in an OTB event is very difficult to prove unless you catch the perpetrators red-handed; even in online events where post-hoc move analysis is used, that doesn’t prove the player cheated, just that the player’s moves closely matched computer-generated moves.
You’ll need to convince people not only that the current rules don’t work, but also that they would have worked better with a (reasonably small, please) revision.
The relevant rule is rule 20, Conduct of Players and Spectators. It takes up six-and-a-half pages in (my copy of) the 7th edition rulebook. It is divided into fourteen sections 20A through 20N, some of which are sub-divided further. Cheating is already discussed in many of these areas, some of which obviously apply to both OTB and online, even though some passages were originally written in the pre-online era of the distant past.
That is the crux of the matter. Specifically:
Micah, it might be helpful if you could come up with a handful (one or two) suggested revisions, totaling 200 words or less, that would likely solve whatever problem it is that you are trying to fix. The rule as it stands is not all that bad. It should not be necessary to propose a seven-page rewrite.
Bill Smythe
Getting this off my chest …
Here we are more than 2 weeks in, and Magnus continues to dribble out comments, after each one saying he will have more later, as he continues to attack Hans Niemann.
I thought Carlsen was a fine man. A standup WC, always available, cagey but never outside the lines. Now I think much differently about him. I even think he’s changed. The old Carlsen is nowhere to be seen here, but a petulant vengeful child. Does he think he can get away with it because he’s the great Magnus Carlsen?
When Carlsen says he wants to see this clarified one way or the other, he must know that there’s no way Niemann could further clear his name. The experts looked, they found no evidence, Carlsen surely had the opportunity to contribute his evidence and observations, case closed. But Carlsen is desperate for something to substantiate his allegations, because he has nothing. And he doesn’t expect to have anything, otherwise he’d play Niemann again with friends and spies present to catch him out, or beat this poor weak Niemann who is no threat on his own.
His excuse-makers say he’s not saying more for legal reasons. It seems to me that’s backward. If there’s defamation, it’s because he is not presenting evidence. As this drags on, the damage becomes concrete, even if he corrects it later. If what he has is more chess.com evidence, so what?
His latest complaint is that Niemann played relaxed against him while outplaying him. But the player who almost always plays relaxed, and never gets tired, and can capitalize on imperceptible (to humans) mistakes and grind down anyone else in the world, is Carlsen. Maybe Carlsen has spent his career cheating. Of course I don’t know the mechanism, but that’s not required is it, just a feeling. But now that I say it, it fits doesn’t it? Carlsen may feel a desperate need to get Niemann off the stage, because his computers have met their match.
Nepo made a podcast of over an hour, mostly about this issue. But his statement was contradictory. He suspects Niemann because of slow steady progress rather than uneven progress of kids a few years younger. But at the end of that podcast he suspects Niemann because of playing much better in St. Louis than in the event before in Turkey. Damned if you do or if you don’t, if you’re Niemann and enough of the world’s 2700+ rated “elite” players don’t want you around.
A new article on the Times of London website has this quote from Carlsen:
“I believe that Niemann has cheated more — and more recently — than he has publicly admitted.”
The article also says (though not in a direct quote) that Carlsen has vowed never to play Niemann again.
Niemann has offered to play naked, but so far I don’t think he’s agreed to the idea of playing in a Faraday cage.
Back in the early 70’s there was a TV series called Search in which the operatives had the ability to send radio signals via a molar implant. I think they also could have radio receiver implants. Both technologies are possible today.
The Washington Post has a lengthy article on Carlsen’s accusations, too. Nakamura is quoted several times.
There’s also a new story about it in the Wall Street Journal.
Here is Malcolm Pein’s take on this situation:
There’s something in the Pein piece about a major merger in the works in the online chess community, but not much details. What’s going on and should people be concerned about that?
You’d have to ask Malcolm Pein. I don’t know any more than what is in the article.
I had to deal with Malcom some years ago when he was running the US Chess webstore, that was plenty.
Chess.com is acquiring Play Magnus Group (including Chessable, New in Chess…) https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/sep/02/chesscom-swallows-play-magnus-while-kushal-jakhria-sets-new-world-mark