Carlsen’s public statement: “I believe that Niemann has cheated more”

by ChessBase
9/26/2022 – A day after getting a convincing victory at the Generation Cup, as he anticipated, Magnus Carlsen has shared a public statement regarding the polemic surrounding his withdrawal from the Sinquefield Cup and his quick resignation against Hans Niemann. The world champion wrote: “I believe that Niemann has cheated more — and more recently — than he has publicly admitted”. | Photo: Amruta Mokal
Your personal chess trainer. Your toughest opponent. Your strongest ally.
FRITZ 20 is more than just a chess engine – it is a training revolution for ambitious players and professionals. Whether you are taking your first steps into the world of serious chess training, or already playing at tournament level, FRITZ 20 will help you train more efficiently, intelligently and individually than ever before. 

“He wasn’t even fully concentrating”

Magnus Carlsen has finally explicitly stated why he took two dramatic decisions in the last few weeks: to withdraw from the Sinquefield Cup after three rounds and to resign a game on move 2 against Hans Niemann at the Generation Cup.

It had to do, as we all suspected, with Hans Niemann’s alleged cheating. 

The statement appeared on the same day that the US Chess Federation announced the field for the 2022 edition of the US Championships, with Hans Niemann in the lineup.

Useful links

Carlsen’s statement

Originally posted on Twitter

Dear Chess World,

At the 2022 Sinquefield Cup, I made the unprecedented professional decision to withdraw from the tournament after my round three game against Hans Niemann. A week later during the Champions Chess Tour, I resigned against Hans Niemann after playing only one move.

I know that my actions have frustrated many in the chess community. I’m frustrated. I want to play chess. I want to continue to play chess at the highest level in the best events.

I believe that cheating in chess is a big deal and an existential threat to the game. I also believe that chess organizers and all those who care about the sanctity of the game we love should seriously consider increasing security measures and methods of cheat detection for over the board chess. When Niemann was invited last minute to the 2022 Sinquefield Cup, I strongly considered withdrawing prior to the event. I ultimately chose to play.

I believe that Niemann has cheated more — and more recently — than he has publicly admitted. His over the board progress has been unusual, and throughout our game in the Sinquefield Cup I had the impression that he wasn’t tense or even fully concentrating on the game in critical positions, while outplaying me as black in a way I think only a handful of players can do. This game contributed to changing my perspective.

We must do something about cheating, and for my part going forward, I don’t want to play against people that have cheated repeatedly in the past, because I don’t know what they are capable of doing in the future.

There is more that I would like to say. Unfortunately, at this time I am limited in what I can say without explicit permission from Niemann to speak openly. So far I have only been able to speak with my actions, and those actions have stated clearly that I am not willing to play chess with Niemann. I hope that the truth on this matter comes out, whatever it may be.

Sincerely,
Magnus Carlsen – World Chess Champion

Topics: Hans Niemann, Magnus Carlsen
Reports about chess: tournaments, championships, portraits, interviews, World Championships, product launches and more.

Discuss

Rules for reader comments

 
 

Not registered yet? Register

Science22 Science22 9/30/2022 09:03
We are in a completely similar situation in chess here and now. Although the evidence that Hans Niemann is a fraud based on both his own terrible analyzes of games and mathematical statistics is overwhelming, his trolls are up to the task with aggressive outbursts against all critics.

Niemann cheated at the age of 12 for financial gain and prestige. He was caught. Then he developed better method of cheating at the age of 16 with the same motives. And was discovered again. The consequence of these serious breaches of ethics and morality is classic for a deviant personality. Niemann tries again at the age of 19 with an even smarter system because prestige is more important than ethics.

What Niemann does not understand, and will never understand, is that scientific methods for detecting fraudsters are constantly evolving, and the higher he cheats his way up the system, the more is at stake for all, including for sponsors. They pay to have him checked, and there is also always a whistleblower lurking in the background who knows exactly what has happened.

Shivasundar, once again, I am a scientist. I support scientific methods to preserve and develop life. We cannot land safely on Mars if we cheat with the calculation and risk. We have to be honest. Chess is for me a wonderful pastime, I don't want to have destroyed by destructive fraud.
Science22 Science22 9/30/2022 08:45
Young chess players here must understand that we older people have been here many times before.

In the years 1999 - 2005 Lance Armstrong won the tour de France 7 years in a row. It was an outstanding performance. But already in the year 2002, my colleagues in biology and medicine said, on the basis of published measurements, that Armstrong's hematocrit number was far too high not to indicate doping.

If Armstrong was to train for so many red blood cells, he had to cycle up and down Mount Denali (6,190 m) every day for a month before the competition. But anyone who criticized Armstrong for using doping cheats was met by hordes of aggressive fans, not to mention Armstrong's lawyers.

Armstrong benefited enormously financially from his cheating. He became a multi-millionaire from his tour victories. He only admitted doping in 2013 when the evidence was so overwhelming that he might as well lay the cards on the table.
arzi arzi 9/30/2022 06:44
All of us are guessing what has happened. No one really knows, not even Carlsen. That is why Carlsen should either stop this nonsense or put some "hard" evidences" on table. History of Niemann`s cheating are NOT hard evidences. They are known to happened already, from 3-5 years ago. The real time is now.

I agree with what shivasundar wrote a little further down. We don't know, we guess, we speculate.
tauno tauno 9/30/2022 03:26
@shivasundar. Quick steps by FIDE. I thought it would take several weeks to get this far. Good and clear communication. Hope they are transparent throughout the process and we get all the relevant information. A lot of activity must happen behind the scenes. They probably want to end this as soon as possible. Let's hope they don't make any hasty decisions.

However this ends, I believe this crisis will increase and accelerate the personal development of both Magnus and Hans, which will be great in the long run. But I wonder if they will ever thank each other explicitly.
shivasundar shivasundar 9/30/2022 01:25
Okay, FIDE is acting, against both Carlsen and Niemann:
https://www.chesstech.org/2022/fpp-investigates-against-niemann-and/
Klaus Deventer: https://ratings.fide.com/profile/12900699

Liked this joke on reddit: "Ban every titled player so us scrubs can get a shot." :-)

Also, this article (cheating in general) broke from chesscom: Among the "damning" things: A few 'top-100' players have *confessed* to cheating!!
https://www.chess.com/article/view/online-chess-cheating

And thus it begins.... now for some popcorn (and sleep for some?)
tauno tauno 9/29/2022 11:37
@AidanMonaghan. I don't think so. It's not at all unusual for a chess player to think for 15-30 minutes in a critical position. And an hour's delay is unrealistic because the chess public would never accept it.

Some suggested a Faraday cage, but that's too complicated. I believe a rage room for Magnus could be a temporary solution, but it might not be evidence-based.

The CIA (or equivalent in other countries) probably have the latest technology to detect hidden receivers and jam radio signals. Why wouldn't FIDE consult them?
shivasundar shivasundar 9/29/2022 11:25
@tauno, it is possible that Magnus genuinely messed up though! It has happened before - he "protested" to play the Chennai match and even released a statement before *finally agreeing to play* ! (He also quit the previous cycle - so he is 'known to throw tantrums'). We can say that may be he "saw a ghost when there wasn't any"... 53 games is a LOONG time to stay unbeaten - he DOES also hold the world record at 125 games; he DOES wanna reach 2900 (so much so he doesn't care about WC anymore - 'coz that wud barely even maintain his rating)

Cones, we have not even found a needle so far in the haystack! We are "missing the forest for the trees" - nice pun on "tree cones" no :-)?

Again, just so @Science22 understand - I am *just speculating* here, based on solid facts :-)
shivasundar shivasundar 9/29/2022 10:54
@Science22, I am completely clueless as to where I have lied on this whole saga (tauno found the Kamsky tweet). I AM criticising Neimann - this kid cheated TWICE and I *abhor* that - I hope he pays some kind of price for that; my friend! Am I ALSO not allowed to feel sorry for him though?

Think about it; put yourself in Hans' shoes:
1. Mega corporation disses you on the SAME DAY you beat the world champ (AND arbiters and organizers say they *find no evidence of cheating*) - and bans you forever.
2. MC doubles down, staying "lawyerly silent".
3. chesscom doubles down, but won't release anything *either*!
4. Whole world is "out to find evidence" (suspect evidence, both by FIDE FMs) when the major 2 entities are NOT releasing any!

Even in mega-sports like baseball or football, I read, the penalties for cheating are multi-year bans, not life bans! What do you propose? Burn him alive?

He IS staying silent: but man, won't *you* be shit-scared and lawyer up if a large corporation is out to get you A, and B. if you just passed high school and "only order out and work on chess for 12 hours, with not many friends"?

I do criticize the silence also; BUT, all things considered, I think the silence of chesscom and MC are *much worse* - on a qualitative level!! I just donno man, donno... I really hope that he can just say "okay, I cheated more on chesscom - and I messed up - sorry. But never OTB." I hope that's what really happened... I donno though.
tauno tauno 9/29/2022 09:53
@shivasundar, I found that tweet by Kamsky, thanks for the tip! He also has some other good points.

It feels a little strange that in his public statement Carlsen is referring to statistical anomalies that actually don't even exist. Could his suspicions be ill-founded? Don't say that. It seems that there is now an entire army desperately looking for anomalies like mushrooms in the forest after a rainy day. They should be able to find something. Cones, at least.
Science22 Science22 9/29/2022 09:19
To everybody who wish to understand the origin of this conflict. Read FunGur9959 :
https://www.reddit.com/user/Chemical-Ad- 8202/comments/x77ga7/is_hans_niemann_a_psychopath/

It is my opinion that a normal and completely innocent person who was exposed to the pressure Hans Niemann is under would have taken legal action against the world chess champion long ago.

Even a normal but guilty person would not be able to just sit silently and wait on the sidelines. It would hurt too much.

The only type of person who would be totally indifferent to the media storm would be someone with strong psychopathic traits combined with a narcissistic personality structure.

shivasundur you try constantly to intimidate all solid critics of Niemann through right up lies. I have never supported that person. I also dont suppert Carlsen. I support science, and science tells me Niemann is a complete fraud.
shivasundar shivasundar 9/29/2022 09:11
@Science22, I think it is clear you are siding with "wherever the wind is blowing" (today Carlsen, yesterday Hans): all I am (and have been) saying is this: it is better to suspend judgement, but carefully study whatever comes out man. Good luck, I wish the best to you (even IF you were/are a 'Trumpian')...

Let me try and summarize what the reddit thread analysis of Yosha says - try to have an open mind man: it says that every time Let's Check is used, different (numbers and strength/types of) engines are used - and in Neimann's case 150+ (!!) engines were used (also sus, by itself!). Now, in common-sense terms we would call it "are we comparing apples to apples, or apples to oranges"?

Makes sense? SO, again, right now *all actors* are MEGA-SUS still! [On a personal note, I would maybe urge you to read the Mahabharata, one of the world's longest and oldest epics - where most characters are not 'black or white' but many-layered and grey! Cheers again :-)]
AidanMonaghan AidanMonaghan 9/29/2022 08:37
A 15-30 minute delay of active game move release will make cheating via outside engine/RF communications almost impossible.
Science22 Science22 9/29/2022 08:30
Matthias Ruf has ended the debate: "The program shows Sebastian Feller and Hans Niemann in the top ranking above all world champions with their accuracy in game play."

Sebastian Feller is already known for cheating with his 98% accuracy against computer moves in games of over 40 moves. But it has been surpassed by Hans Niemann, who has played many games with 100% match to the computer's suggestions.

Anyone with the slightest understanding of statistics will know that this is conclusive proof that Hans Niemann is a fraud. If you put a monkey in front of a computer, there is a finite probability that it will write the complete works of Shakespeare without spelling errors. It is not high, but on par with Hans Niemann's 100% computer precision in many games over 40 moves.

I look forward to read the many comments from trolls here when Niemann realise the scam is over. It will be great fun.
shivasundar shivasundar 9/29/2022 08:10
@tauno: "I must agree with Carlsen that there is something unusual with Niemann’s OTB progress"
Have you seen Kamsky's twitter post? His rise (in the early 90's) - from 2500s to 2700s was equally impressive. Also, what about many of the prodigies today - their rise mirrors this. The reddit thread mentions has a clear graph:
https://i.redd.it/59sgugyn4cn91.png

Also, I have done some stats on the FIDE-published rating lists before. I pulled that up - this is October 2021. Here are some stats:
Total rated players: 371,974
Players rated over 2700: 39
(Players *ever* rated above 2700 according to wiki: about 125 or so: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chess_players_by_peak_FIDE_rating#List).
This gives me a percentile they are at: 99.99516%!! Effectively these guys are *not normal* but EXCEPTIONAL people among the general public (not to mention the people who are even *rated by FIDE*) - at the 0.005% of all humans on earth!
Alexandru27 Alexandru27 9/29/2022 03:16
I'm not impressed.
arzi arzi 9/29/2022 01:50
From same link:"The other is a post by Dlugy immediately after Niemann beat Carlsen:

“Just 16 months ago or so, I recommended to Hans to really focus on endings. He devoted a lot of time to this pivotal part of the game and today I am proud to say that his endgame play is sufficient to beat the reigning World Champion from a better position"

That is the purest form of cheating! To tell other how to play against Carlsen! Shameful!
arzi arzi 9/29/2022 01:42
Carlsen:"Last week, Carlsen was asked what he thought of Niemann, the up-and-comer who defeated him at a high-profile tournament and whom Magnus eventually accused of cheating. Carlsen gave a peculiar answer: “Unfortunately I cannot particularly speak on that. But, you know, people can draw their own conclusion and they certainly have. I have to say I’m very impressed by Niemann’s play, and I think his mentor Maxim Dlugy must be doing a great job.”

Yes, Carlsen can not speak about it but can give hints about it, with mentioning mentor Maxim Dlugy. This proves it all, I`m convinced!
tauno tauno 9/29/2022 01:05
Again a nice and juicy article in Vice. This time about Dlugy.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/z34qz8/chess-grandmaster-maxim-dlugy-admitted-to-cheating-on-chesscom-emails-show
arzi arzi 9/29/2022 12:53
Science22/Trump: Carlsen doesn't have to prove anything, Carlsen doesn't have to prove anything, Carlsen doesn't have to prove anything,
Science22/Trump: I believe, I believe, I believe, I believe (It is enough that you just believe me!)

Basically the most hard evidence is to actually listen to Carlsen explains about his beliefs that there are some mysteries in his lost game against Niemann. "How can I lose even though I played a crappy game. I am invincible, almost a God". Like an old man caught in the traffic with his pants down.
Science22 Science22 9/29/2022 12:27
A teenager plays against hundreds of experienced masters from all over the world. No matter where they come from, no matter what variants they have in the bag, he has a counter-response based on a clever tactical turn. In all types of opening. When he has to explain himself afterward the variations, the mask falls off him completely.

Hans Niemann will never sue Magnus Carlsen. Because the evidence of cheating is there. Here is was Niemann fears the most if suing : Many lovers of chess will offer large sums of money to any person who comes forward with evidence of having helped Niemann with technical equipment to cheat. They're out there, and he knows it.

He has cheated before, but got caught. Then you can either improve your moral or your ability to cheat. Pick a choice.
Science22 Science22 9/29/2022 11:34
Trump : I won the election, I won the election, I won the election, I won the election....
Trolls here : no evidence of cheat, no evidence of cheat, no evidence of cheat .....
Completely empty statements repeated over and over to make a lie the truth. That is the M.O (Modus Operandi )

Basically the most hard evidence is to actually listen to Niemann explains his motivation for playing as he did after the game. It is terrible, Like a child caught in the act with their fingers in the cake tin
tauno tauno 9/29/2022 11:28
I must agree with Carlsen that there is something unusual with Niemann’s OTB progress (the bumping up and down awhile at 2300). I'm glad he brought it up. But the rise of Vincent Keymar from 2500 to 2700 is really something.
https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/xc0b9n/how_chess_prodigies_climb_after_hitting_2300/
Matthias Ruf Matthias Ruf 9/29/2022 11:21
Did a German Sheep Dog catch Hans in Luck as wolf in sheep's clothing?

ChessBase comes from Hamburg with the feature "Let's check". The programm shows Sebastian Feller and Hans Niemann in the top ranking above all world champions with their accuracy in game play. Never mind if you like Yosha Iglesias or if there are proven miscalculations in probability. It could also be that team Magnus made the same conclusion before Gambitman on Twitter or Andrii Punin on YouTube. But claims for damages go in millions in the USA. A clever cheater will not use all the time the same computer program. The Ukrainian FM Punin showed that Stockfish 11/12 and Rybka could have been used in older games. What a misfortune that a German company developed a tool who uses different chess engines. Still GM Niemann is a very strong blitz player and a good entertainer in his stream. I have doubts in the credibility of multiple cheaters. As Magnus mentioned Hans Niemann has in Maxim Dlugy from New York a good mentor. The expensive trainer and onlinecheater argued in his lately revealed emails to chess.com that a pupil gave him the computer moves in his two Tuesday wins, not knowing that the weaker player used his smartphone. What a joke, was it someone we already know? Not guilty! A lawyer will always find good excuses.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 9/29/2022 11:15
@Flopmartin the difference between suspicion, suspiciousness, accusation and proven guilt is as follows:

Suspicion is the feeling that something bad happened.

Suspiciousness is the objective reason to feel that something bad happened.

Accusation is the act of publicly sharing a suspicion that something bad happened.

Proven guilt is the factually proven (based on hard evidence) that someone did something because of which something bad happened.

Carlsen has a suspicion that Niemann cheated. Yosha's viral video makes the case that Niemann's play was suspicious in the wake of the cheating scandal. Carlsen accused Niemann of cheating.

While we may accept that Yosha made a proper case for proving that Niemann's play is suspiciously good, there was no hard evidence presented. In civilized endeavors whenever one is accusing someone, the accuser needs to present hard evidence. This has not happened so far. Therefore Carlsen did not make a proper case for proven guilt, even if we take Yosha's video into consideration. Why would we factually exclude that Niemann just played well? We need serious foundation for such a statement. I'm not saying that Niemann has cheated. I merely say that Carlsen did not provide sufficient basis for his accusation. So this accusation is slanderous until proven to be true.
Science22 Science22 9/29/2022 11:07
Shivasundar refers to a nonsense page. The usual aggressive, contentless spin to bother Magnus Carlsen. There is not a shadow of documentation for the many lies about which machines have analyzed what.

Yosha, on the other hand, carefully reviews, match by match, tournament by tournament, how there is a mathematically significant difference between Niemann's performance when the matches are broadcast live and when they are not broadcast live. He drops down 200 ELO
arzi arzi 9/29/2022 09:53
shivasundar, do all these different analysis proves Niemann´s cheating or not cheating in Sinquefield Cup and Julius Baer Generation Cup?
shivasundar shivasundar 9/29/2022 09:27
Hello all, There is clear online rebuttal of Yosha's analysis: https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/xqg6t7/why_engine_correlation_is_a_garbage_metric/

Also, as I mentioned before, she is a chess24 employee. Hence:
1. There is obvious conflict of interest
2. She could have been asked to do this
Flopmartin Flopmartin 9/29/2022 09:05
Since my last post I watched Yosha's viral video and I must say it is quite striking and has changed my perspective on the matter. Is there still room for a credible defense of Hans' performance?
sivakumar R sivakumar R 9/29/2022 08:52
I remember Carlsen showing " fear of the unknown " before becoming the world champion:
https://en.chessbase.com/post/im-deeply-disappointed-by-the-fide-decision-070513
https://en.chessbase.com/post/norway-sends-complaint-paris-ready-to-bid-040513
arzi arzi 9/29/2022 06:32
Now all together on our knees, hand in hand, let us pray for grace for ourselves and strength to believe, just like our role model, the world champion Carlsen. I can see the light, I BELIEVE.
Magic_Knight Magic_Knight 9/29/2022 06:13
People need to realize that while MC is one of the greatest players in chess history (if not the greatest!) he is still human....he is not beyond reproach, he is imperfect, he is not immune, and he is not above the law. Which means.....he needs to have evidence as much as any joe-schmoe that is going to accuse (or imply or hint) that another person is cheating. MC's word is no trustworthy than anyone else's. So far all MC has is his "gut feeling" since Hans didn't seem like he was nervous or stressed during his game with MC. What does not amount to? Absolutely NOTHING.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 9/28/2022 11:38
@Herrman

"If anyone will be in a position to play a match against Carlsen and wants to play it dirty they now know to get him of balance "

Good point!:)

@Jack Nayer

"Buford: If you are what you say - a scientist - you should understand that Regan's analysis is nonsense. A schoolchild can understand it after thinking about it for a couple of seconds. "

Can you explain how Regan's analysis is nonsense? Thanks!

@tympsa

Where is/was Niemann's device?

@Zagliveri_chess

"In a civilized society you shall not defame or slander anybody without evidence. Otherwise anyone who rises to power using such tactics will eventually rule by fear."

Agreed. The way Carlsen accused Niemann is the actual problem in my view. He should first have some evidence or very strong arguments for Niemann's alleged cheating at the Sinquefield Cup and then accuse Niemann. If there is no such strong base for the accusation, then he should accept his defeat.

"I do not see why you cannot as easily take someone to court for slander."

I cannot speak for Niemann, or for anybody else, but, from my perspective, if I was baselessly accused, then I would not really want to waste time and energy in court because of it.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 9/28/2022 11:34
@lucienlatourtes

"Once a cheater always a cheater!"

Carlsen received outside assistance from Howell. So, will we say he is always a cheater?

@tacticalmonster

"Carlsen's accusation is like a witness's testimony in the court of law."

Carlsen is not really a witness. He is the accuser in a case where he didn't even claim to be seeing/hearing anything direct. He only described his beliefs and feelings.

@enfant

"A cheater between the ages of 12 to 16 is now
only 3 years later, playing world class chess.
Which is more likely? That his chess improved
that much in so little time, or his method of
hiding the cheating. "

The quote above is fallacious, as it invites assumptions based on probability. But we do not need to assume anything. In cases when A accuses B, A has to present evidence. If A presents convincing evidence, then B is proven guilty, case closed. If A does not manage to do so, then he failed making a proper case.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 9/28/2022 11:33
@tandemm

"A question for the masses of pro-Niemann trolls"

I'm not sure who you have meant, but I would not call people trolls just because they do not share my opinion. Also, you have promised a single question, yet, you asked several :)

"Why would it be that 90% of people on the Internet apparently support this obnoxious sociopath that uses a fake Russian accent in interviews?"

I'm not sure whether there is a 90% support (if so, are 90% of the people trolls?). I know that I personally do not support Niemann and am not particularly fond of him. I oppose baseless accusations in general. If Carlsen provides convincing evidence for his allegations, then I will acknowledge he was right, but then I would wonder why did he wait for so long with that. But I doubt he would ever back his claim with evidence.

"Let me guess, do you all also believe that the Theranos woman was legit?"

The what?

"Why am I supposed to believe that the majority of the Internet supports this creepy sociopathic guy over the guy who is arguably the greatest chess player of all time?"

It was your assumption in the first place, I have never seen statistics to back this up. No one forces you to believe that 90% of the people sides with Niemann.

"Why would he have even more fans than Carlson?"

The name is Carlsen. And to answer your question: it's called freedom of opinion.
lajosarpad lajosarpad 9/28/2022 11:29
@Daniel Miller "We don't need a burden of proof because we already have an admission of guilt. Once someone pleads guilty you don't have a trial."

I'm sorry, but you are wrong here. If you committed an offense in the past, that does not prove that you committed the same offence now. Even former thieves deserve a fair trial after they served their sentence. Niemann deserves a fair trial. I'm not saying he is innocent. I'm saying that if we condemn him without evidence, then we set a precedence for destroying talented prodigies, independently of whether Niemann is guilty or not.

"It does not matter that it was online, or 3 years ago. It is enough to ban him for life."

We cannot make up new rules and apply them in hindsight. None of the non-totalitarian justice systems work like that. If the rule you have suggested above would be introduced, then it would apply to future offences.

"If someone cheats on Sundays, we don't need to also prove he cheats on Mondays."

If someone claims that the cheater cheats on Mondays as well, then the claimant needs to prove that. Carlsen did not satisfy by saying that Niemann's past cheating worries him and he does not trust him. He said he believes he cheated more.

"He cheated three years ago and chess.com and other GMs probably know of more."

Why didn't they share that information with us then?

@Buford

"[...] and all that is happening, without direct evidence, is the slandering of a 19 year old kid by the best players in the world."

Agreed (until I see proof of the contrary)
lajosarpad lajosarpad 9/28/2022 11:26
@calvinamari So, if someone has been caught stealing in the past and now the same person is accused of a concrete stealing, then we should assume his guilt?!

@Science22 I never believed that one day Arzi would be equated to president Trump, it was the joke of the day!

"[...] Because then his scam does not work."

Can you elaborate on Niemann's scam? I wonder about concrete things. Who are his accomplices, what evidence convinced you about this, how did he receive the suggestions, etc. Someone who has "Science" in his/her name operates with facts, right? I sure hope that you do not imply that Niemann's alleged cheating should be accepted as a fact, while it is unprovable when you have written:

"Place a mini Farady cagee deep in the ear or hair. An electronic instrument inside the Farady cage cannot be detected."

"So who do you trust ?
A top class player like Hikaru Nakamura
Or one of the agressive trolls here ?"

I trust facts and evidence. Can you point out who the three most aggressive trolls? How did the "aggression" manifest?

@PJBaptista the career of a person is at stake. I would like to know what is the best evidence Carlsen & co can provide. So far it is "I believe". Even youtubers could do better who actually made the effort to analyze Niemann's game and try to make a case for his supposed cheating.

@galeb3 "why he need a permission, for what ? " Great question. If it is a proof, then Carlsen should share it independently of what Niemann says to protect others from a cheater. If not, then I wonder what it is.
saturn23 saturn23 9/28/2022 09:00
wermoll - that's a clear example of Carlsen cheating in online chess. He did not ask for advice but he did accept it without any problems. I think the right thing to do when you receive unsolicited advice is to resign the game (it's bullet after all). And Nakamura plays a lot of chess while checking his chat at the same time during streaming. Don't tell me that he has never received any suggestions from the chat.

And let's not forget that both Carlsen and Nakamura tried to cheat in over the board chess by trying to take back moves. Carlsen tried to do that in at least two blitz games (one against Alexandra Kosteniuk) and Nakamura tried to do that in a classical game against Aronian.

It's clear that systematic cheating using engines is much worse than what Carlsen and Nakamura did. But if Carlsen and Nakamura claim that chess has a cheating problem then they should at least make sure that they don't actually do it themselves. Any kind of cheating is bad, not only systematic cheating using chess engines.
abdekker abdekker 9/28/2022 07:31
Wise words from Malcolm Peim. This saga discredits MC and all the brands he is associated with, such as chess.com and Play Magnus. As the reigning World Champion, airing dirty laundry like this in public with vague feelings and no evidence damages the game we love. This whole affair should have been handled privately. For shame, Magnus.
wermoll wermoll 9/28/2022 06:29
Hello.

Video “Magnus Carlsen streams Lichess Titled Arena December '21”
(rated and prize money online tournament)
date of the tournament: “18-12-2021, 20:00”
date of the video: 19-12-2021
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRdrf1Ny3x8&t=6215s (at 103' 35")
link of the tournament: https://lichess.org/tournament/dec21lta
(https://web.archive.org/web/20211218215149/https://lichess.org/tournament/dec21lta )

LICHESS – Terms of Service
“Do not cheat or receive assistance in games (from a chess computer, book, database or ANOTHER PERSON)”
https://web.archive.org/web/20211216032929/https://lichess.org/terms-of-service (16-12-2021)
https://web.archive.org/web/20211219230629/https://lichess.org/terms-of-service (19-12-2021, not changed since 16-12-2021)
from https://lichess.org/terms-of-service
and
LICHESS – Fair Play
“When playing on Lichess, you must not:
1. Cheat. We prohibit the use of any external assistance used whilst a game you are involved in is ongoing, which has the effect of improving your knowledge, calculation ability, or otherwise gives you an unfair advantage over your opponent. Examples of cheating include, but are not limited to, using a chess engine, opening books, endgame tablebases, RECEIVING MOVE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM ANOTHER PERSON (...).
2. (…)”
https://web.archive.org/web/20211229212749/https://lichess.org/page/fair-play (the only save of the page in 2021)
from https://lichess.org/page/fair-play

Now, 2 QUESTIONS:
- Why did Magnus “cheat”? (I think the verb "to cheat" can be used with regard to its action)
- Did the platform adopt any sanctioning measure regarding the irregularity perpetrated?

P.S. If you think the comment is wrong, please remove it, no problem.
P.P.S. Forgive me for my bad English.
tauno tauno 9/28/2022 04:13
This is not so much about cheating. It’s mainly about Carlsen's bad behavior during the last few tournaments and his personal vendetta against Niemann after a stupid loss. The cheating allegations are a slightly different matter and should be dealt with separately.

Carlsen can believe whatever he wants, but if he believes that Niemann has cheated him (or anyone else) it's not his business to punish Niemann. If Carlsen really believes he's been cheated, he can take it up with FIDE and the organizations in question. And he surely doesn't need any evidence or a bunch of lawyers to do it! A suspicion is enough, right? Then the organizations and FIDE can investigate the matter thoroughly and, if necessary, take disciplinary measures and put things right.
Previous12345Next