He's obviously a cheater and should be banned. However, just for clarification, why does it matter whether someone uses chess engines and so forth while playing online? I can see that being a means of improvement, since online seems like it is just practice. Is it in reference to online games against the computer or against real-life opponents online? Is it because the ranking # you can on chess.com is somehow relevant to real world seeding?
It's in reference to real-life opponents, often in matches or tournaments involving substantial prize money. And on-line results can affect whether a player receives invitations to certain OTB tournaments or whether a player will become successful as an on-line chess "streamer," which has become a surprisingly hot market these days. (I've been shocked to discover how weak some of the "streamers" actually are; I'd much rather watch and listen to a truly great player like Nakamura.) Niemann himself has talked about how hard he worked to increase his on-line ratings in order to gain invitations to tournaments and attract fans to his streaming site. (One especially shocking revelation in the chess.com report is that Niemann cheated in every game of an on-line match against, of all people, Ian Nepomniachtchi. That hardly fits with Niemann's assertion that he merely cheated in a few "random" on-line games.)
There are some grand masters who stream, but there are also popular streamers with a rating under 2000. They have difficulty against chess pros so most of their chess vids are matches against "hustlers".
We've been banned from talking about many individual runners with threads getting deleted left and right so it's either chess or talk about the enticing ethnicity/sex of superheroes.
I don't know much about chess but if he cheated that much online, he cheated in person. End of story. How? Who knows..
I'll pay him $100,000 if he agrees to play him again naked and beats him.
That's a false equivalence. Tons of people cheat in online chess just like tons of people cheat in Fortnite. If you watch porn online, does that mean you cheated on your girlfriend in person?
Prepare to lose $100,000 because there are ways to cheat without wearing any clothing, like with the dental implants I described before.
GM Hans Niemman's Channel - https://www.youtube.com/c/HansNiemannChessEncourage Mike to Play More By Getting Him Coffee! - https://www.paypal.me/bostonmikech...
any of you guys ever watch hans comment on a match reasonably soon after its been played? and then also watched guys like magnus, hikaru, nepo, the young azerbaijani, etc, do the same? we're talking about massive differences in ability to remember specific positions and compare them to specific positions in earlier matches theyve studied. hans will be like "its sort of like this other position, well, no, maybe three other pieces were different, and you know, this move at some point becomes winning..."
magnus will be like "it IS this position from the vishy game, and this bishop wins it at THIS time, after these other developments."
i dont know enough about chess to know whether this is all that meaningful, given that i know lots of successful people who arent very articulate... but hans has never sounded like he has the kind of mastery other guys do.
The accomplice would just put what he sees from the livestream of the board into a chess engine on his smartphone and then use the handheld radio to broadcast what the next movie would be either as audio, Morse code, or whatever signs. The accomplice doesn't even have to be nearby if he uses HAM radios with some power. The tooth implant or filling would just play the signal back as bone conduction sound that only he can hear.
I've also wondered about using a dental implant for this. Also, as Magnus and many others have discussed, a relatively strong GM wouldn't even need any specific moves to be transmitted from an engine or collaborator. If, just once or twice during the entire game, the player receives a simple signal that a critical position has been reached, or a simple indication that one stands better or worse in a particular position, the effect on game results and performance ratings can be huge.
Right, for example in the recent Game 1 between Carlsen and Erigaisi in the Julius Baer Generation Cup finals, on move 23 Magnus played Bh4 which was a blunder only if black responds with g5. The commentator Peter Leko, when he saw the evaluation bar swing in black’s favor, immediately knew that g5 must be the critical move as none of the other replies could possibly lead to such an advantage for black. However, it wasn’t a “natural” response as g5 is a move that puts the pawn where it can be captured by either white’s bishop or pawn (and it’s unprotected). However, if Erigaisi had had the benefit of the massive swing in evaluation, he almost certainly would have found g5 and would have had a better rather than worse position (and probably would have drawn or won rather than lost that game).
any of you guys ever watch hans comment on a match reasonably soon after its been played?
Hans rattling off all the moves from memory - no board - in an interview right after playing two games 3 years ago at age 16 has already been posted several times.
There's no reason for him to keep doing the same thing just to impress a bunch of ignorant potzers. Neither Magnus nor anyone else do that after every single game either.
There's no world championship of who can best recite their games right after they're played.
any of you guys ever watch hans comment on a match reasonably soon after its been played? and then also watched guys like magnus, hikaru, nepo, the young azerbaijani, etc, do the same? we're talking about massive differences in ability to remember specific positions and compare them to specific positions in earlier matches theyve studied. hans will be like "its sort of like this other position, well, no, maybe three other pieces were different, and you know, this move at some point becomes winning..."
magnus will be like "it IS this position from the vishy game, and this bishop wins it at THIS time, after these other developments."
i dont know enough about chess to know whether this is all that meaningful, given that i know lots of successful people who arent very articulate... but hans has never sounded like he has the kind of mastery other guys do.
World Chess Champion Magnus Carlsen is put to the test by English Grandmaster David Howell! How many games can he recognise? Please note the Kasparov-Karpov ...
any of you guys ever watch hans comment on a match reasonably soon after its been played?
Hans rattling off all the moves from memory - no board - in an interview right after playing two games 3 years ago at age 16 has already been posted several times.
There's no reason for him to keep doing the same thing just to impress a bunch of ignorant potzers. Neither Magnus nor anyone else do that after every single game either.
There's no world championship of who can best recite their games right after they're played.
It’s true that most GMs don’t remember every single move of every game they played, possibly even a recent game, but Hans’ Sinquefield and other interviews, for which he has been widely mocked, did seem off, almost as if either he was trolling or he actually couldn’t convincingly explain the strategy in certain positions like GMs at his level are usually expected to do.
chess.com also pointed out his post-match interviews as an issue explicitly. Lay people may not find anything problematic in Hans’ Sinquefield interview, and it is indeed possible he was just stressed and shaken up and talking all over the place that day, but GMs can make out the difference between say a 2300’ish player and a 2600+ based on their analysis of the game. Few doubt that Hans is talented enough to be a GM or thereabouts (a peak 2500 rating), so we are talking about like a 10% difference here, sort of like a sub-11 sprinter vs a sub-10 sprinter — a huge difference.
Exactly, we need Derek from Marathon Investigation to switch his focus to chess . . . statistical analysis of splits / moves to determine probability
Great job Derek did falsely accusing Ashley Paulson with his biased "statistical analysis" of Badwater splits and then had to walk it all back and grovel.
watch him play against this really cute girl who's also really good at chess, master level, and watch how good he is!!! Everyone cheats online! Anyone who knows anything about chess knows that Neiman is a genius and is certainly a grandmaster and top 50 player in the world When they say he cheated online they mean he might have used the computer for one move or consulted a computer on one move! And that's a whole different thing from cheating in person Anyway he won today first round of the US Open (30 minute delay and EM transmission scanners) and he has a good chance to win the tournament and will be top 10 in the world over the next 7 years and probably has a chance to be world champion down the line he's that good!
This is the kind of thing that I mentioned earlier. Andrea Botez may be a "really cute girl," but she is not "also really good at chess, master level." Her current rating is about 1700, and she's never even broken 1800. Nobody watches her stream because she's a good player. Hans Niemann, however, can't attract an audience because he looks good and wears sexy outfits. (That's not to say that a rather ordinary-looking man can't be a very successful streamer. The famous Croatian player known as "Agamator" has been an extremely successful chess streamer, even though he's currently rated under 2000 and has a lifetime peak rating of, I believe, just 2010. He obviously does his daily game commentary only after conducting extensive engine analysis on the game.)
Hans rattling off all the moves from memory - no board - in an interview right after playing two games 3 years ago at age 16 has already been posted several times.
There's no reason for him to keep doing the same thing just to impress a bunch of ignorant potzers. Neither Magnus nor anyone else do that after every single game either.
There's no world championship of who can best recite their games right after they're played.
It’s true that most GMs don’t remember every single move of every game they played, possibly even a recent game, but Hans’ Sinquefield and other interviews, for which he has been widely mocked, did seem off, almost as if either he was trolling or he actually couldn’t convincingly explain the strategy in certain positions like GMs at his level are usually expected to do.
chess.com also pointed out his post-match interviews as an issue explicitly. Lay people may not find anything problematic in Hans’ Sinquefield interview, and it is indeed possible he was just stressed and shaken up and talking all over the place that day, but GMs can make out the difference between say a 2300’ish player and a 2600+ based on their analysis of the game. Few doubt that Hans is talented enough to be a GM or thereabouts (a peak 2500 rating), so we are talking about like a 10% difference here, sort of like a sub-11 sprinter vs a sub-10 sprinter — a huge difference.
Niemann's interview after Round 4 of Sinquefield was a disaster, both in his discussion of the game against Carlsen and his analysis of the subsequent game with Firouzja. Nakamura's comments during the interview showed what a huge gap exists between a top grandmaster and Niemann.
I would also like to point out that, after defeating the relatively weak (but very promising) 15-year-old Christopher Yoo in Round One of the U.S. Championship yesterday, Niemann simply refused to engage in any post-game analysis or answer any questions about the game. The interview was both revealing and laughable:
Someone actually built an anal insert cheating device that connects with wifi and vibrates to demonstrate it is possible to cheat at chess this way. This seems easier than a dental implant but I think even simpler electronics that just consist of a passive antenna is better so you don't emit signals that can be detected. Did the judges do an anal probe just to be sure? I think this method of cheating is actually very realistic and is probably in use by quite a number of players and have gone undetected.
